Labels are powerful. Merely by labelling an ideological cause 'justice' or 'equality' legislative battles can be won before they even get started. Everybody is against socialism because it doesn't work, but nobody is against 'justice' or 'equality' or 'morality'. By renaming socialism 'justice' and 'equality' it becomes possible to pass all kinds of socialist legislation without the hassle of any debate. Would you be willing to stand up and argue against a bill that has been titled 'Equality' and promoted as the 'moral' thing to do? Would you vote against a bill titled 'Hate Crime' when we know that both hate and crime are immoral? The label itself tells everyone how they must vote and allows dissenters to be denounced as evil. There is no point promoting 'unity' when those on the other side people are evil - nobody wants to be united with evil.
It is well established that legislation tends to have unintended costs. As Bastiat might have put it, legislation is designed to fix the most visible and obvious problems, but it tends at the same time to exacerbate the unseen and less obvious problems. Therefore when designing laws to regulate human behaviour the question is not so much whether there will be unintended consequences, but whether the cost of those consequences will be outweighed by the hoped-for benefits of the legislation.
Scholar, Writer, Friend