Poverty and Social Justice

The Moral and Political Foundations of Social Justice in an Interdependent World – Report

This meeting was organized and supported by the Friedrich Ebert Foundation(FES) and the Harvard Yenching Institute through the Director of the FES in Washington, Dieter Dettke and the Director of the Harvard Yenching Institute, Professor Tu Wei Ming. Triglav Circle members had taken the initiative to launch this joint seminar. Participants were accommodated in Cambridge and met at the Arts and Science Center and Harvard University. There were twenty-three participants, including persons involved with the Friedrich Ebert Foundation, the United Nations, the World Bank, the Kennedy School and the Harvard Divinity School. The topic for discussion was The Moral and Political Foundations of Social Justice in an Interdependent World.

The four themes proposed in the agenda were:
What are the causes of the current aggravation of social inequality and of the apparent neglect of the idea of social justice? What would be the consequences of a continuation of the trend towards more inequality in the distribution of income and wealth among social groups and classes and among countries? What is the rationale for advocating the pursuit of social justice in today’s world? And, what are the means for pursuing social justice in an interdependent world and globalized economy?

An overall increase of various forms of inequality
The diagnosis of the overall aggravation of inequalities in the world, notably in terms of distribution of income and wealth within and among countries but also in access to work, employment, education and other social services, is well documented and was not questioned. This trend started in the mid 1980s and followed a reversal of trends in the narrowing of income and other differentials that had been prevalent since the end of the Second World War. That the cause of this reversal was and continues to be the ideological and political “revolution” that unfolded under the leadership of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, was also not questioned at this meeting. And today the prevalence of security issues on most national and international agendas pushes further aside matters of equality and equity.

Inequities, or the tension between liberty and justice
The question that begs to be addressed is at what point inequalities – which are inherent to the functioning of a free society and free world – become unfair and unjust? Is it not true that the champions of social justice, during the course of two centuries of struggle and upheavals, neglected that fundamental human right of individuals which is liberty, including the liberty to work, create and be rewarded for one’s activity? The “revolution” of the 1980s has delivered the world to the forces of global capitalism but it has also given millions of individuals the sentiment that they were responsible for their life. There is always a dialectic tension between liberty and justice on national and global planes, but disequilibrium hampering freedom of the individual had to be corrected. Moreover, progress is being made in regard to “horizontal” forms of inequality – notably between women and men and among different ethnic groups – despite temporary setbacks and reversals. Equality in respect to other human rights is also progressing in a positive direction. More preoccupying therefore for the citizen of the world and the concerned public intellectual should be the growing inequalities among countries and the increasing difficulty to attain peaceful coexistence among peoples of different religions and civilizations.

Culture of competition and the neglect of social justice
It might be so, but there is a continuum, intellectually and politically, between inequalities within countries and inequalities among countries. The link is made by the dominance of a culture of competition and expansion which is focused on the acquisition of wealth and power. According to this culture, the one – individual, nation, or continent – that does not succeed and is left behind in the race for comfort and possessions, is seemingly guilty of incompetence, lack of openness, laziness, “structural” weaknesses and corruption. For a number of reasons, including the security of those who have wealth and power, these marginalized peoples and countries might be “assisted” – or coerced when necessary — but their situation and claims do not put into question the basic tenets of a dominant culture representing progress and prosperity for all. Hence, among other signs of the time, is the rise, under the aegis of the United Nations, of humanitarian concerns and the quasi disappearance of activities justified by social development and the quest for social justice. In the international discourse, the notion of development itself tends to be replaced by “integration in the world economy” and “sharing the benefits of globalization.”

Public policies to tame the power of capital
Most participants in this meeting expressed the conviction that this dominant culture of materialism and consumerism needs to be questioned, challenged, reoriented and enriched by a more complete and more realistic conception of human needs and aspirations. A continuation of present trends would stimulate more violence and result into increasing chaos and perhaps eventually the self-destruction of humankind. As an antidote, it should be considered that generosity is as “natural” as selfishness. Moreover, justice and liberty should and can be reconciled, notably through public policies seeking the common good as opposed to serving parochial interests. After all, a number of governments have maintained equitable market economies and decent welfare systems. The raw power of capital needs to be tamed at the international level as it was tamed in the materially most affluent nations before the 1980’s.

Love as an informant of Reason
Emphasizing Love as the informant of Reason is a way out of this contemporary abyss in global justice. This observation and similar comments that were made are along the line of what might be called spiritual humanism. Establishing bridges between spiritual humanism and liberal humanism is to be truthful to the Enlightenment tradition. One such bridge is the conception and practice of power – whether political, technocratic, scientific or corporate — as a service to humanity. Ultimately, participants stressed, that there would be neither justice nor peace in the world unless the demonic drives for power were curbed.

Contributed Papers

Executive Summary

In close cooperation with the Friedrich Ebert Foundation and the Harvard-Yenching Institute, the The Triglav Circle held a meeting in Cambridge, Mass, on 16-17 September 2005. The subject for discussion was The Moral and Political Foundations of Social Justice in an Interdependent World . Four themes were proposed in the Agenda: What are the causes of the current aggravation of inequalities and of the apparent neglect of the idea of social justice? What would be the consequences of a continuation of the trend towards more inequality in the distribution of income and wealth among social groups and classes and among countries? What is the rationale for advocating the pursuit of social justice in today’s world? And, what are the means for pursuing social justice in an interdependent world and globalized economy? There ensued a day and half of rich and lively debate.

Participants shared the view, which is fairly well documented including through official international and national studies and statistics, that inequalities are currently increasing in most countries of the world. Such inequalities include the distribution among individuals and social groups of income, of wealth, of opportunities for remunerated employment and satisfactory or decent work, of access to essential services such as education and health, and of possibilities for political participation in the affairs of the City, be it a town, a nation or the world as a whole. Inequalities are also increasing among countries, not only because of the hegemony of the United States, but also because the various “gaps” that separate affluent from poor countries are deepening. Conspicuously, the rich – individuals, social classes and nations – are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer, in relative and often in absolute terms.

Societies and the world appear to heading towards an increasingly sharp divide between a few who “have” and a great majority who “do not have” and this trend is, by all historical standards, loaded with risks of conflicts, violence, and dislocation. A dramatic change, in ideology and policies, took place in the mid-1980s with the advent of conservative regimes in the most powerful Western liberal democracies and the dominance of neo-liberalism as an economic theory. The meeting noted that at the same time this “revolution” of the 1980s marked the liberation from political oppression of millions of people and the progress of democracy in the world. This apparent contradiction led participants to discuss the difficult relationships between freedom and social justice, as well as the need to deepen the notion of democracy. It also led participants to meditate on the concept and practice of power. Even more important, given the nature and orientations of the Triglav Circle and its effort to give additional dimensions to the public debate, the role of fundamental dimensions of the person, notably the search for love and the need to give to others and society, were evoked and discussed as the true foundations of justice and harmony in societies. In this context, a rich debate on the respective “merits” and complementarity of love and justice, took place.

Back To Top