# data[].attributes.body
Intrinsic to its name, social justice cannot be achieved through the work of one or some, it must be achieved through the work of many – a society. As such, the most effective leadership for social justice must be highly inclusive so as to unite people on moral grounds and tap into each person’s obligation to their fellow citizens. Transformative leaders in this space are humble and proactive in their approach to improving systems and human relationships, acknowledging that social dynamics are just that – dynamic – ever-changing, and constantly in need of re-evaluation and assessment (Gardner, 2000). Regardless of the perceived status of a system, these leaders must be like a “healthy person aspiring to be healthier,” (Scanlan and Theoharis, 2015, p. 3) recognizing that complacency and privilege are the enemies of social justice.  Social justice leadership empowers the “haves” to be influential in ensuring the rights of the “have-nots”, and it empowers the “have-nots” to be facilitators in the changing processes that will ultimately protect their rights and their access to those rights.

Successful social justice leadership effectively disperses responsibility beyond the perceived leader, or leaders, at the “top” of a system which empowers all actors to be thinkers, questioners, learners, listeners and transformers. Although many leaders fear the delegation of power, the act of empowering people through added responsibility causes more people to own the mission of the movement. When people own the mission of a movement, their focus shifts away from self-interest and, in the case of social justice concerns, moves toward a loyalty to the morality of the cause (Gardner, 2000).

Transparent, respectful communication between leaders and followers is an inherent quality of true, transformative social justice leadership. This communication of sentiments and feelings must be successfully transmitted between both parties – that is, people must be able to express themselves, and they must be assured that their expressions are heard and considered. Effective top – down communication, as in the case of a principal working with her stakeholders, ensures that all parties understand a leader’s system, as well as its purpose and intended outcomes. When soliciting the opinions of their constituents, which transformative leaders must frequently do, leaders must delineate how they intend to consider these sentiments in their future decisions. In the wake of decisive action, they then must clearly articulate how the feelings of their constituents informed their ultimate decisions; this ensures that people’s perspectives are validated and it encourages “followers”, or those who lack executive power, to communicate in the future regardless of if the leader’s chosen direction met their hopes and expectations. Bottom – up communication, as in the case of parents and students working under school leadership, is paramount to the vitality of any system because the voices of those who are historically muted are often the most important for leaders to hear. In a school system, this method ensures that the principal receives honest feedback about the effectiveness of their system from all stakeholders, particularly those whose culture does not align with the traditional models that have become entrenched in so many districts. Unfiltered communication enlightens leaders to examine the biases of their systems and increases the level of shared responsibility that is felt within the community (Cooper, 2010). Humble communication creates a space for the violations of social justice to be unearthed and for the access of civil rights to be newly had.

Furthermore, successful social justice leaders must look not only within their sphere of influence and policy making, but also without. The aforementioned internal process of self-reflection and community dialogue is paramount to sustaining a viable system that promotes and maintains a socially just culture, but it is also vital for leaders to look outside their system and their community for continued growth opportunities by maintaining Communities of Practice. Leaders who become active members of Communities of Practice solicit unbiased feedback from, and share best-practices with, other leaders who are seeking to accomplish similar missions in their respective spaces (Scanlan & Theoharis). In this transformative relationship that is intended to be mutually beneficial, the direct feedback that a leader receives is relevant and potentially transformative for the growth of their system that they yearn to be socially just. At the same time, when a leader provides feedback to other leaders and objectively evaluates that leader’s methods, she is likely to think critically when she reflects on her own system in the context of another.

Social justice leadership is a never-ending dialogue that is meant to serve those who have been historically marginalized and those whose rights have been oppressed by unjust systems and their leaders. Social justice leadership acknowledges and considers everyone’s feelings and opinions, but it does so with the unyielding focus of aspiring to ensure that all people have equal access to their rights.

# data[].attributes.headline
Color Blind and Gender Blind = Avoidance and Ignorance

# data[].attributes.subject
Color Blind and Gender Blind = Avoidance and Ignorance

# data[].attributes.body
Racism, sexism, classism - they're all real. They're ingrained in the history of the United States, both deep in the country's past and in the present. When people ignore these "isms" as they attempt to overcome them, they are trying to solve a context dependent problem while avoiding the context. Any solution that they claim to come up with will lack the contextual relevance to be transformative in the name of social justice. To attempt to take a color blind approach to racial injustices, or a gender blind approach to gender inequity, is to avoid addressing the deeply rooted causes of the aforementioned "isms", like White privilege and the American patriarchy.

Mark A. Gooden claims that scholars support this assertion when he explains Critical Race Theory in his work "What Does Racism Have to Do with Leadership?" He posits, "concepts of colorblindness...take precedence over interrogations of White privilege," ultimately steering the conversation away from the fundamental issue (2012, p. 72). Gooden, when analyzing the work of principal Joe Clark, notes, "CRT reminds us that racism is endemic in America and we must not view these realities in race-neutral terms," (2012, p. 72). He goes on to claim that schools in particular avoid "confront[ing] racism on a micro-level" because it is too "controversial" to "challenge a mainstream neutral narrative" that avoids "institutional or societal" racism all together (2012, p. 72). When approaching social justice issues, history must be a resource that guides decision-making because it is inextricably intertwined in the systems and norms that preclude citizens from accessing their rights.

In 1969, Shirley Chisholm commented on the inseparable relationship between history and racial injustices in the United States of America when she said:
"We [African Americans] who have been born here...have not been able to become fully assimilated in the American culture because of an unmistakable and almost insurmountable barrier that just will not disappear because color doesn't disappear," (1969). While pointing out that a racial barrier has prevented Blacks from being integrated into American culture, Chisholm acknowledges the fact that society has never been color blind, and it never will be - because it literally can't be. A staunch advocate for the rights of the marginalized, particularly African Americans, Chisholm rejected the color blind approach to overcoming social injustices.

# data[].attributes.headline
Shirley Chisholm on Privilege and Principle

# data[].attributes.subject
Shirley Chisholm on Privilege and Principle

# data[].attributes.body
Social Justice Leadership asks everyone - the privileged, the oppressed, the marginalized, the self-proclaimed neutral - to examine their biases, and it asks everyone to voice their perspective. It roots decision-making not in the name of what has been or what is, but instead in what should be.

Shirley Chisholm's quotation below encapsulates this morality based approach to human interaction:

# data[].attributes.headline
Human Rights: The Foundation for Social Justice

# data[].attributes.subject
Human Rights: The Foundation for Social Justice

# data[].attributes.body
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was established by the United Nations following World War II, defines the fundamental human rights of every human being on Earth. The Preamble, as well as articles one, two and seven of the document, emphasize the importance of human rights to humankind, and they clearly outline some of the most basic human rights that are guaranteed to all human beings. When people seek social justice, they are attempting to overcome a system, perhaps socially or politically constructed, and perhaps consciously or subconsciously instituted, that prevents a certain group of human beings from fairly and equitably accessing their fundamental human rights. For citizens of the United States of America, these human rights are guaranteed in the nation’s Constitution, but more importantly, for citizens of the world, these rights are guaranteed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Preamble: "Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world..."

Article 1. "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood."

Article 2. "Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion...or other status."

Article 7. "All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration." (1948).

In these excerpts, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights touches on specific conditions that are paramount in order to achieve social justice, recognizing that ultimately the ability for human beings to access their own human rights is the foundation for world peace.

First, social justice requires collaboration, morality and humility. In order to overcome oppressive systems, people must approach the plights of others with a selfless, realistic mindset.

Second, social justice means consideration for everyone, but also careful and particular consideration for those who have compromised access to their rights.

Third, social justice encompasses the entire definition of the word "justice". "Justice" has two meanings in this context - that which equates to fairness and equitability with respect to the human condition, and that which relates to fair and equal treatment under the law. In the case of social justice in American society, the inequitable access to "justice" under the law for particular groups has prevented them from achieving "justice" in the societal sense.

# data[].attributes.headline
"The Struggle for Human Rights" by Eleanor Roosevelt 

# data[].attributes.subject
"The Struggle for Human Rights" by Eleanor Roosevelt 

# data[].attributes.body
In her 1948 speech, "The Struggle for Human Rights", Eleanor Roosevelt commented on fundamental freedoms and their importance in the future of humankind.

"The peace and security of mankind are dependent on mutual respect for the rights and freedoms of all."

"The right of choice would seem to us an important, fundamental freedom."

In the process of contributing to the U.N. Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Roosevelt singled out the Soviet Union as an example of a country that claimed to provide its people with a basic right, the right to work, but which simultaneously violated its people's right to choose. Many Soviets at this time, living in a socially unjust country, were unable to access all of their human rights.

In the United States in 2019, many marginalized and minority groups face a similar plight - they superficially have access to a right, like education, but, in actuality, they do not have access to an equitable opportunity in that space. Lyndon B. Johnson, in his "Great Society" speech (linked in a different section) made a similar observation: "classrooms are overcrowded and curricula are outdated. Most of our qualified teachers are underpaid, and many of our paid teachers are underqualified. So we must give every child a place to sit and a teacher to learn from. Poverty must not be a bar to learning, and learning must offer an escape from poverty," ( 1964). While Johnson only referenced students in poverty, 55 years later his observations apply to a massive population of marginalized Americans, particularly racial minorities. As a result of academic inequities, those same people are then disadvantaged in other aspects of their lives, which further prevents them from equitably accessing future opportunities. As Roosevelt mentioned in the quotation above, the right to choose is a fundamental freedom; however, a gross number of marginalized young Americans, as a result of a system that perpetually fails to acknowledge the deeply rooted institutional racism that exists at its core, will have their right to choose severely compromised.

# data[].attributes.headline
Eleanor Roosevelt: Human Rights and Peace

# data[].attributes.subject
Eleanor Roosevelt: Human Rights and Peace

# data[].attributes.body
On Human Rights Day, celebrating the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and spreading awareness around the assurance of those rights, Eleanor Roosevelt stated that she hoped, "the building of human rights would be one of the foundation stones on which we would build...an atmosphere in which peace could grow," (1951, video. 1:10 - 1:25). The quest for social justice and each person's access to their innate human rights is at the core of many human conflicts. It is a tireless struggle, one which many whose rights are secure take for granted, and one which all whose rights are thwarted struggle with every day.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.entities[].name
Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidential Library

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Speech by Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt for a TV Program on Human Rights Day Archival footage from the FDR Presidential Library

# data[].attributes.body
During his presidency, Lyndon B. Johnson continued the legacy of his late predecessor, John F. Kennedy, as he championed his vision for a "Great Society". WIthin the speech, he commented:

"The purpose of protecting the life of our Nation and preserving the liberty of our citizens is to pursue the happiness of our people. Our success in that pursuit is the test of our success as a Nation."

"Your initiative...will determine whether we build a society where progress is the servant of our needs, or a society where old values and new visions are buried under unbridled growth."

"The Great Society is a place where every child can find knowledge to enrich his mind and to enlarge his talents."

The Great Society is not...a final objective.... It is a challenge constantly renewed." (1964)

In this speech, Johnson ties the nation's potential for success to a dogged, never-ending pursuit of progress. At the heart of his "Great Society", Johnson places "liberty" and "happiness", two values reflected in the United States Declaration of Independence. The allusion to this monumental document is significant because the document represents the fight to achieve freedom from oppression and the freedom of self-determination, two fundamental objectives of the fight for social justice.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
LBJ's University of Michigan speech, 5-22-64.

# data[].attributes.body
In Lyndon B. Johnson's speech, he notes that the solution to America's problems "do not rest on a massive program in Washington" but instead they "require us to create new concepts of cooperation," (1964). This quotation speaks to the nature of progress in the name of social justice. For people to disengage and leave the establishment of policies solely in the hands of those who have the "power" to make them is irresponsible citizenship. Similarly, for those in power to unilaterally create new systems without seeking to understand the perspectives of all stakeholders, particularly those who are marginalized and those whose voices have previously been muted, is irresponsible leadership. While on the surface it might seem convenient for leaders and policymakers to establish broad-sweeping systems that combat injustice and promote equity, it is nearly impossible for these leaders to completely rid themselves of their biases when creating such systems. This assertion is supported on a micro-scale by Camille Wilson Cooper's example of the North Carolina principals who sought to overcome some of their  institutionalized shortcomings but who failed to acknowledge and receive objective feedback about their own biases (2010, pp. 184, 185). In the field of education, many school leaders have the tendency to perceive themselves as experts and the stakeholders who make up their academic communities as supporters (2010, p. 176). In many ways this is, and should be, true: school leaders whose life's work is in school leadership should have more expertise on the subject than those whose stake in the system is fleeting. However, a leader's ability to facilitate transformative results, a leader's ability to implement their expertise, depends completely on their ability to understand the needs and wants of the constituents who ultimately bring about the results. As Gardner notes in "The Nature of Leadership", the most effective leaders carefully consider the needs and the circumstances of their followers so as to earn their confidence and garner their support (2000, p. 30).

Successful Social Justice Leadership necessitates that leaders utilize a "bottom-up" approach, concerning themselves first and foremost with the voices of those who institutionally lack both power and a voice, as the primary method for Johnson's aforementioned "cooperation".