No. In the US, it is far more fundamental than your "social justice issues". Your evaluation of the "Social Gospel" movement is relevant but does not fully explain the situation.
Our nation was founded on basically what amounted to a mix of biblical principles and ancient philosophies on republican government. Our founders equated "the nation" with the people, not the government. So when they spoke of a "Christian nation", it was because Christian values provided the discipline necessary for a civil society.
The basic premise and "value" is that the individual in America is sovereign to almost the same degree as a monarch was in Europe. In a monarchy or totalitarian state, rights belong to the government and are distributed to the people as privileges. In a free society, rights belong to the individual and should not be confiscated or intruded upon by government. This does not mean that 51% gets to demand that 100% pay an income tax... it would more properly mean that anyone should be able to opt out if they don't like the way the government spends the money.
Indirect taxes by the way, tax economic activities, not individuals, and are legitimate for financing government.
The first step in the wrong direction came out of the Civil War. Though slavery was a horrid abuse of the rights of men, the erosion of constitutional principles began as "states rights" was defeated in what is still the bloodiest American war.
In 1913, an amendment to the USC was "declared" ratified which allowed direct taxation (ie. income tax). This was seen as a threat to individual liberty and specifically forbidden by the framers. The definition of income in 1913 did not include wages but was instead synonomous with profit.
In the 1930's, the combination of the Great Depression and heavy immigration (particularly Catholic) from Europe left us vulnerable to government encroachments in the name of helping people. Many argue and I agree, that FDR's programs were not getting us out of the Depression and would not have done so without WWII. People were helped and fed... but private organizations deserve great credit for this as well. Many of the Great Society programs were intended to be terminated... but eventually were left in place or transformed.
WWII led to a whole new era. Many rights were suppressed and violated in the name of the war effort. The offenses of the Roosevelt Administration (an icon to liberals) were far more egregious than anything done by Bush and Ashcroft.
During WWII, the "Victory Tax" was implemented as basically a voluntary wage tax system. It continued afterwards to pay down war debt. By the 1950's, it was accepted... though the threshold's were so high that almost no one paid it. Democrats over the next 30 years refused to move the brackets and inflation brought more and more Americans into the "taxpayer" class.
By the end of the 1950's, a large portion of the American populace thought of government action as a force for good. They believed in "good government" and allowed it to grow progressively more intrusive. The high water of liberalism in the US was the 1970's when both their economic and social views were dominating the institutions of centralized power- government, media, education.
The "Republican Revolution" of 1994 was a national recognition of this mistaken view. Most Americans today believe that government should shrink... the horn is that they think it should shrink in different ways.
Prior to the 1913 income tax and the belief in good government, the US federal gov't had no sustained debt and operated on less than 7% of the gross national product. Today, our debt is hopelessly unpayable and deficits are the rule... and government absorbs approximately 27% of the gross national product. Oh yeah... in 1900 the poor, disabled, and elderly were taken care of and even the "Wild West" wasn't as violent as south central LA. They certainly had problems but nothing that rises to the levels of today... after our government has spent trillions of dollars on social programs.
PAJim, others, and I believe in a return to the system and philosophy of government that made America great. I am more pragmatic in that I believe the Republicans represent brakes that will allow us to slow down and turn around safely. PA Jim's approach is that the issue is so urgent that we need to do a Duke's of Hazard move and turn around at full speed... even if it might cause alot of damage.
I'll be racing away in the General Lee, and leave Larry and Joseph to put out the smoldering embers of the GOP.