This review is premised on the idea that poststructuralist theorising, particularly deconstructive conceptual ideas, is often seen as incongruent with research focused on social justice. Poststructuralism--if one can risk homogenising it into the one singular category given the variety of nuances--is considered anti-foundationalist. The utility of poststructuralist thinking(s) within the realm of social justice research is often focused around the usefulness of it to instigate (macro)change. To be more succinct, how can a paradigm that sets out to "undo" foundational ideas belong within a body of research aimed at improving social inequalities and injustices? How can one "improve" a situation without putting forth a series of suggested practices? How can "undoing" be seen as a political practice when it is perceived as being grounded in the abstract, not the material? This article takes these questions as its general point of departure and attempts to facilitate the intelligibility of poststructuralism within the realm of social justice research by advocating for a reconceptualisation of what "social justice" means.