Justice

Each getting his/her fair share according to his/her capability, choices and preferences. It is what we should do as right and not do as wrong.

Sources: religion, historical tradition/customs, natural law, reason and rationality

Plato -> fundamental virtues: wisdom, justice, temperance, courage

Aristotle -> Justice: equality, proportionality, maintenance of equilibrium

Rawls -> Justice as fairness

Nozick -> Justice as entitlement

Sen -> making people capable to live life of dignity and fulfillment

Friedrich Von Hayek -> 1899-1992, The Road to Serfdom, derided social justice as mirage, advocated distribution as outcome of market transactions as just.

J.W. Sapmann -> distributive justice, book -> "Justice and fairness". He associated concept of "Economic rationality of man" and "consumer's sovereign"

His 2 principles

1. Distribution of opportunity show be arranged in a manner, that brings maximum benefits and rewards.

2. Distribution of social resources should not be arranged in a manner, that at the cost of majority's interest, minorities interest are fulfilled.

"Justice requires that no one shall gain at the expense of another"

Nations of Equality, Liberty, Rights are based on the concept of justice

Definitions

Justice as harmony of soul and each individual and class performing its duty to best of their abilities and aptitudes- Plato

Justice as 'fairness’ in distribution of income, wealth, rewards, honors, political offices, punishments etc., based on the principle of equity- proportional and arithmetic equality- Aristotle 

Justice as Fairness in distribution of resources, awards, honors, and political offices- John Rawl

Entitlement Theory of Justice: distribution of holdings in a society is just if everyone in that society is entitled to what he has- Robert Nozick

Justice by practical reasoning; justice as fair procedure (Niti) vs justice realized (Nyaya)- Amartya Sen

Justice as perfect obligation- J.S. Mill

Justice as mutual advantage- David Gauthier

Types

Procedural justice:

Justice based on just, fair, and transparent rules/procedures, formal, legal, and institutional justice.

Fair play, formal justice, equality of opportunity, consistent with liberal ideology.

Following just rules and procedures shall result into fair outcome

4 principles:

1. being fair in processes
2. being transparent in actions
   
3. providing opportunity for voice
   
4. being impartial in decision making
   

closer to individualistic, liberalist ideology.

Both Nozick's and Rawl's theory of justice based on principles of procedural justice

Distributive justice:

Just distribution of goods (social primary goods) and services, benefits and responsibilities such as rights, liberty, income, wealth etc. May also imply social justice if equality of status, dignity of individuals, and minimum needs of people are ensured by society/community/state.

Idea of fair share - realized justice

Basis of distribution: merit, need, equality/equity, moral values

Rights (procedural justice more towards rights) and common good (distributive justice more towards common good)

Substantive Justice, justice of outcome, fair share, closer to communitarian and socialist ideology, realized justice. 

Retributive justice:

Justice is reasonable and proportionate punishment to crime.

Restorative justice:

Repairing the harm caused to the victim and mend the offender to bring back to mainstream.

Global justice:

Pursuing justice at international level. How to bring procedural justice in international arena where no international government.

John Rawls's Law of Peoples provided different models of global justice

Theories of Justice

Conceptual map, hypothesis, models, and approaches to help understand justice and attainment of it.

Liberal theory of Justice 

Based on social contract:

John Rawls - Justice as fairness,

Nozick's - Justice as entitlements

Non-social contract based theories:

Utilitarian theory of justice: greatest happiness to greatest number.

Kantian theory of justice: Moral duty based supreme principle of morality - categorical imperative

Capability based approach to justice by Amartya Sen

Non-liberal theories

Feminist theory of Justice

Marxist theory of Justice

John Rawl's: Theory of Justice

Might be most important theory of 20th century.

1. This theory is applicable only to liberal society;
2. He also gave "Overlapping consensus": In a liberal society, individual/groups may have different conception of justice but all may have some basic common agreement point on what must be protected to have justice in society;
3. Society as a "Corporative venture for mutual advantage";
4. Parties in the contract (individuals) had unencumbered selves - they were independent and autonomous in choosing their own goal/end based on their own conception of good life; they were not pursuing ends decided by society for them;
5. He revived the social contract approach in 20th century;
6. To him, Justice is the first virtue of any society/community;
7.  For him, Peace, stability, efficiency, and Justice were essential feature of best society;
8. Rawl’s theory of justice: end-state theory, patterned distribution, welfare state, based on difference principle, distributive justice, positive or modern liberalism, normative theory, revived the social contract tradition
9. First Virtue of society- Justice
10. First virtue of Justice- Fairness

His Books

1. A Theory of Justice - 1971;
2. Justice as Fairness - 1985;
3. The Law of Peoples - 1993;
4. Political Liberalism - 1993;
5. Two Concepts of Rules;

Assumptions and definitions

Social contract: People come together, leaving 'state of nature' to frame rules to construct society.

Initial position: Beginning of a society or political system when members of society frame rules to govern social life.

Veil of Ignorance: Members of society framing rules are ignorant of their status and position in society.

Rawlsian individual: Stripped down abstract individual: free, and equal, rational, self-interested but not egoist, individualistic, autonomous but having 'sense of justice', and conservative risk takers.

If above conditions are true, then members of society will form rules that are based on justice or equality or distributive justice (if society do not possess equality), and further equality and distributive justice.

People will make rules for worse of people because they are conservative risk taker, they might think that they might be the worse of people.

Two principles of justice

Principle of Equality Liberty: Each person has an equal right to the most extensive liberties compatible with similar liberties for all.

Difference Principle: Social and economic inequalities should be arranged so that they are both - to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged persons, and - attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of equality of opportunity.

First preference -> Equality Liberty (first principle)

Second preference -> Difference principle -> second principle (justice as fairness)

Third -> Difference principle -> first principle

lexical priority:

1. 1, 2b, 2a;
2. Liberty principle, fair equality of opportunity principle, difference principle;

Features: 

Under controlled conditions, rational individuals, having different notions of morality, would frame rules for social-political order consistent to idea of distributive justice.

It cancels out the role of natural and social brute luck in arriving at notion of justice

It blends of procedural and distributive justice, human and egalitarian approach to liberal ideology

Idea of 'chain connection': society is strengthened by strengthening its weakest link. Weaks and Strongs are connected.

Provide a standard for assessing distributive structure of any society

Combination of virtues of individual rights and societal good, is important plus point of his theory. It explains how even following individual self-interests and concept of good life, we can achieve social common good and reach a decision which bring just distribution in society.

Justice based on rationality independent of individual morality.

Communitarian critique:

Individuals are not separated from their social context, choices made by individuals abstracted from their socio-economic context cannot be consistent to societal conception of 'Good' and hence cannot be bring just social order.

Feminist Critique:

Ignore private sphere of family in which there is no gender justice.

Consider family a just and apolitical institution

Unjust family cannot develop 'sense of justice' in future citizen

'Public justice; around the reality of 'private anarchy and injustice'

His individual is head of family and is man. His individual characteristics are mostly men, female qualities such as caring, nurturing, empathy, co-operation, etc. undermined 

No 'difference principle' inside family

No solution for gendered division of labor, patriarchy, women's subordination in family.

Based on moral norms of man - impersonality, rationality, universality, reason.

Robert Nozick's theory of justice: Justice as entitlements

Nozick’s theory of Justice: Entitlement theory of justice, procedural theory, libertarian account of justice, included ‘reificatory justice’

Work:

Anarchy, State, and Utopia

1974 -> counter view of Rawls with his libertarian view

People own themselves, part of natural world acquired fairly, and goods produced by their interaction with owned part of natural world.

Individual has absolute rights over legitimately acquired property

Legitimate acquisition: 3 ways

Initial Position: make property their own on first come first served in initially unowned world by making no one worse off.

Voluntary Transfer: of legitimately acquired property by fair contract and consent.

Rectification: unjust acquisition may be rectified by compensating transfers to one who suffered.

If the initial distribution of property just, society over time reached current position through just process of voluntary transfer and acquisition, if there are inequality, there is nothing for state or society to do in this case, as initial distribution of property is just, and process of distribution is just.

He said it no possible to know whatever initial acquisition and distribution is just or unjust. There is no option rather than accepting that initial distribution is just and transfers that will be happen in future should be just.

If state, distribute property equally among its people, after this again voluntary transfers will begin to happen. Which will lead to again an unequal distribution of property. To maintain equal distribution of property, state have to constantly redistribute property. Any attempt to enforce a pre-decided pattern of distribution impossible without constant intervention of individual's liberty and rights.

His view -> if initial acquisition and voluntary transfer were just, there is nothing to do for state. Individual liberty and property are highest. State should minimal and night watchmen state. Tax's are shitty things.

Protection of individual liberty to its core. Historical and un-patterned distribution better than patterned distribution.

Global Justice

Concept that seeks to find solution to problem of how best to secure a just life for all individuals on planet earth, regardless of their nationality or status.

Just and fair distribution of global resources, benefits and responsibilities, and equal status to all nations.

Attempt to theorize the concept to propose principles and institutions which is agreed by all and ensure just global order.

Problems as diverse as gender justice, immigration and refugees, hunger and poverty, rights of minority and indigenous people, warfare, terrorism, and climate change are tackled in the ambit of global justice.

Key Issues and Debates

What justice means at global level?

conception of justice depends on culture. Can there be global theory of justice? Can there be global different principle? What is the range and scope of our duty of justice for people of other countries? Does it mean global equality of opportunity and equality outcome? Is prosperity of a state due to enterprise and political culture and hence solely belong to it? Or everyone has equal right on global resources?

What should be the social unit for consideration of Global Justice?

state or people or individual

Interrelation between them in the context of global justice?

How and who to enforce global justice? Issues of Global governance:

to implement and dispense Justice Autonomy - state/govt., Judiciary - required.

Absence of any global govt. or supra-national authority.

Rawl's law of People, 1999

It means political conception of right and justice that applies to the norms and principles of international relations among people of the world.

People:  Politically organized society having sufficient commonality of culture, tradition, history, world view, way of life. They may have one or more state or none. People are represented by their legitimate govt.

3 kinds of people: Liberal, decent non-liberal, outlaws and burdened people.

Characteristics of Decent Non-liberal people: well-ordered hierarchical society.

• Society must not be aggressive; It must conduct its affairs in ways that are peaceful and respectful of other societies.
• It must provide basic human rights- life, liberty, property, right to formal equality - to all its members.
• Those who administer the law must believe that the law incorporates a common goof idea of justice.
• Must have a 'decent consultation hierarchy' in which the interest of all members of the society are taken into consideration.

 4 Steps Realizing Global Justice:

1. Social contract among citizen of each liberal society/people.
2. Agreement on 8 principles and 3 organizations among representatives of liberal people in 'original position' and under the 'veil of ignorance'.
3. Decent non-liberal people would also accept the law of peoples - because: it would be rational choice consistent with their commitments to be well ordered decent people.
4. Decent people will help non-decent non-liberal, burdened people develop into well-ordered decent people and accepting law of people.

8 principle:

1. Peoples (as organized by their governments) are free and independent, and their freedom and independence are to be respected by other peoples.
2. Peoples are equal and parties to their own agreements.
3. Peoples have the right of self-defense but no right to war.
4. Peoples are to observe a duty of non-intervention.
5. Peoples are to observe treaties and undertakings.
6. Peoples are to observe certain specified restrictions on the conduct of war (assumed to be in self-defense).
7. Peoples are to honor human rights.
8. Peoples have a duty to assist other people's living under unfavorable conditions that prevent their having a just or decent political and social regime.

3 Global Organizations:

1. One for ensuring fair trade among people.
2. cooperative banking institution from which people may borrow.
3. A confederation of people like UN.

Features

Attempt to propose just principles and institutional order on which widest possible agreement among people across globe can be realized.

Based on core liberal principles of tolerance.

Assumptions:

• prosperity of people is due to local factors - culture, values, character, and industriousness of the people.
• Obligation of Limited assistance- no global difference principle.
  

Proposes it as 'Realistic Utopia'

Critique:

Cosmopolitans (Pogge, Nussbaum) -> They believes that humans global citizens and humans have responsibility to all other humans.

Notion of a people is not clear - is it nation? or state? what about multi-state people or people without state or many people in one state? 

Outdated view on relation among state, peoples, and individuals.

Cosmopolitans- criticize it for very limited obligation to help burdened or worst-off people, no global difference principle.

Allows tyrannical govt. deny rights to its citizen and plunder and loot the resources of the nation/people.

Why both liberal and non-liberal people agree on paired down list of human rights?

Gave more weightage to cultural pluralism, leaving to individual pluralism - undermine individuality.

many unrealistic assumptions:  not realist, sacrifices full justice for wider agreement, here not utopic.

Amartya Sen: Theory of Global Justice

Book:

The Idea of Justice, 2009

Non-contraction theory of justice

3 components:

1. It uses elements of social choice (Adam Smith) theory and practical public reasoning to arrive at agreed upon issues to realize justice at global level - no need to search ideal order.
2. Instead of NITI - just rules and institutional fairness, focusses on NAIY - how justice can be realized for people across globe.
3. Instead of building ideal global institutions, trying to realize justice by drawing strength from multiple sources - media, NHO's, global movements, regional associations, international treaties/conventions, global leaders, UN and other international organizations

Instead of aiming for perfectly just order and institution, we may attempt to reduce injustice and advance justice by practical reasoning.