Introductory Remarks

Social justice is conceptually synonymous with distributive justice, and therefore with justice without qualifier. In his Theory of Justice John Rawls, when establishing his two “principles,” refers on several occasions, at the beginning of his demonstration, to social justice, as an equivalent of justice.

Social justice, however, is a recent concept, born, at least in the Western culture, with the exploitation and sufferings associated with the industrial revolution. It is, in its political origins, a denunciation of the injustices stemming from the rise of capitalism and the expression of the conviction that, through revolution or through reform, a just society is possible and ought to be realized. 

(Socialism, social democracy and Christian democratic currents. Post World War II. Social Doctrine of the Catholic Church. )

Social justice, in this tradition, was inseparable from the enjoyment of human rights. All human rights, from the right to a decent salary and decent working conditions, to the right of expression of political dissent and the right to a fair trial. And, of course, the right of women to be treated equally. Social justice was a political concept attempting to put together the heritages of the Declaration of Independence, La Declaration des Droits de l’ Homme et du Citoyen, the Socialist ideals ( more Proudhon than Marx, and of course more Friedrich Ebert than Lenine) and the Christian message of love thy neighbour. I think it is possible to say that for approximately half a century this concept of social justice ideal was universally recognized. It met with familiar grounds in all cultures, and it was seen as an alternative for and a remedy to not only the traditional forms of oppression but also for the injustices and horrors brought to the world by the perverse ideologies of the 20^thcentury. Social justice was identified with hope, with the idea of progress, and with a purposeful and deliberate effort to organize the world according to the exigencies of freedom and justice. This hope and conviction are symbolized and expressed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. ( though the word social justice is neither in the Charter nor in the Declaration, but the spirit of the concept definitely is)

If I use the past tense, social justice “was,” it is indeed to share with you the sentiment that social justice is regressing in the world, is a dying political project and is an embattled philosophical concept. Inequalities, at least income and income related inequalities are everywhere increasing, and extreme or absolute poverty is also increasing, notably in the most affluent countries (China? India? “Reduction” of poverty there is simply the increase in income per capita due to economic growth of the most “classical” type, not broadly based but heavily concentrated in some sectors and regions). Social justice is no longer an “in” expression in the political language. In the United Nations, ever present 10 years ago in the text adopted by the World Summit for Social Development (almost immediately forgotten), it is now used only by a few non-governmental organizations, generally of religious affiliation. It is mentioned once, en passant, in the Millennium Declaration. Philosophically, I do not think social justice, or rather justice, is at the center of the demarche of the post-modernists (also de-construction…) 

Note however that I said income and income related inequalities and poverty. The picture is different in two critical domains of social justice. First there is, I think, continuous progress in equality of rights between women and men. And the search for more equality of various groups of the population – ethnic groups, indigenous people, people with disabilities, and even migrant workers – is very much alive. Also, what used to be called “social inequality”– inequalities attached to status and privileges (French revolution, Stuart Mill ) is probably also regressing ( ?). Secondly, there is, there has been in the last decades unquestionable progress in what we might call economic justice (seen here as part of social justice) and which is the possibility to exert an economic activity of one’s choice, without obstacles put by public authorities, and with the likelihood and reasonable hope to get rewarded for such activity. Rewarded financially and also socially. With the spreading of the market economy basic tenets, of freedom, and of the democratic forms of governments, this economic justice has made great strides.

The picture is therefore, or so it will appear, more composite than I suggested a few moments ago. It could be argued that only redistributive justice is regressing and in trouble, whereas rights and opportunities, equality of rights and equality of opportunities, including efforts to avoid discrimination in its many forms, are progressing. Redistributive justice, or social justice in the narrow sense of welfare state and welfare programs, is regressing for it is the legacy of a socialist ideology that has exposed its shortcomings and limits. And the benevolent efforts of the Christian democratic type at reconciling justice and freedom, including economic freedom, were doomed to failure because they lacked a realistic vision of society and history. There were too soft, too idealist. Too much of Rousseau, not enough of Hobbes, and certainly not enough of Macchiaveli. And the same might be said of efforts in the Budhist tradition. See for example the short life of Small is Beautiful, from Schumacher. This can definitely been argued, even by those who are not so sure that liberal capitalism is or should be the long term horizon of history, or the end of history.

But they are additional considerations, which might take us back to a more somber view of current facts and trends. Briefly, a few of these considerations:

• At a certain level of inequality, notably of income, those at the bottom of the ladder do not have the possibility to enjoy, or even to comprehend, to be aware of their rights and opportunities. They do not have such rights and opportunities. They lose hope in themselves and in institutions that are supposed to make them parts of a community, and a society. And society become fragmented. And human suffering and humiliation increase. Risks of authoritarian regimes. Democracy emptied of its content.
• The use of wealth, of the wealth of those who have seized opportunities, is a very important factor. Morally, socially, economically. At present?
• There is a concentration of economic, financial and political power. Economic justice?
• Trend towards the militarization of society. Violence in all its forms. The most elementary of human rights are violated. And the idea that circumstances justify such violations is spreading. Social justice, justice itself, are obviously incompatible with this trend, or sickness of the world of today.

Urgent tasks.

• Justice and freedom
• Sense of the universal. Of the common family.
• Public institutions. States and international institutions. Public law. Sanctions. Give back to the idea of justice its soft and hard virtues.