Equality versus Justice Debate

When we consider the relation between equality and justice, different

interpretations of these principles would lead to different conclusions. Aristotle
had said that justice consists in treating equals equally and unequals unequally. So
before deciding the course of justice in a given situation, we should first ascertain
as to who are equals and unequals. Aristotle warned that those who are equal in
one respect, are inclined to believe that they should be equal in all respects. For
example, those who are equal as citizens of a state, may think that they are
entitled to equal power, prestige and wealth. When they fail to gain these privileges,
they have a feeling of deprivation or the sense of injustice which eventually
https://telegram.me/UPSCMaterials https://telegram.me/FreeUPSCMaterials
https://telegram.me/MaterialforExam
392 An Introduction to Political Theory
results in a rebellion. This feeling should not be encouraged in order to maintain
peace in society. So the state should not promote the idea of equality.
In the present-day society, those who wish to maintain the prevailing inequalities
of power, prestige and wealth, seek to repeat Aristotle's argument in the name of
justice. They warn that people should not insist on a radical change in the existing
order in order to maintain justice in society. Thus F.A. Hayek (1899-1992), an
Austrian philosopher, in his latest work Law, Legislation and Liberty, Vol. 2: The
Mirage of Social Justice (1976) argued that the idea of social justice is baseless.
Justice is in fact a characteristic of human conduct; a society cannot be just or
unjust. If liberty is curtailed in the interest of equality, it would lead to widespread
tension and dispute on the question of unjust distribution of life's goods. Pursuit
of justice is a matter of procedure; its objective is to promote freedom. It should
provide for maximum opportunity to each individual to serve his self-interest
according to his own knowledge and wisdom.
Thinkers like Hayek defend libertarianism in the name of liberty. Libertarianism
upholds that system where capable and resourceful members of society should
face no obstruction in their way to advancement. They need not be concerned
with poverty and misfortune of others. The rich should not even be taxed to
provide for welfare of the poor. Libertarianism upholds procedural justice which
stands for converting all social relations into market relations. It interprets equality
as equal subjection of all members of society to common rules and regulations.
In its view, the function of the state is confined to ensuring that nobody harms
others' interests by force or fraud. When all members of society are made to
follow the reasonable procedure, its consequences should be acceptable to all.
On the contrary, those who do not wish to maintain the existing socio-economic
inequalities are called egalitarians. Egalitarianism holds that equality is always
just; only inequalities need any justification. For example, John Rawls (1921-
2002) treated liberty and equality as the basic principles of justice, and sought to
explore the conditions under which inequalities could be treated as just. So in
contrast to libertarianism, egalitarianism upholds that system where the poor and
the weak also find opportunities of their advancement, along with the rich and
the strong. Egalitarians argue that in a society where the poor and the deprived
are constrained to lead a miserable and wretched life, there the fortunate cannot

Printed using Save ChatGPT as PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 1/4
 be absolved of all responsibility, even if they are not directly responsible for the
miseries of the former. Egalitarianism severely criticizes those who remain
indifferent to the needs of the needy people in the name of liberty and procedural
justice.
In contrast to libertarianism, egalitarianism upholds substantive justice which
insists out ensuring positive improvement in the condition of the poor and the
weaker. It demands removal of unreasonable inequalities in socio-economic as
well as legal and political spheres. While libertarians wish to maintain status quo,
egalitarians demand a radical change in the prevailing allocation of benefits and
https://telegram.me/UPSCMaterials https://telegram.me/FreeUPSCMaterials
https://telegram.me/MaterialforExam
Concept of Equality 393
burdens in order to ameliorate the lot of the oppressed. Nobody dares to disregard
justice; everybody tries to prove that his own stand conforms to the principle of
justice. But equality is not welcome to everybody. That is why L.T. Hobhouse
(The Elements of Social Justice; 1922) has observed:
Justice is a name to which every knee will bow. Equality is a word which
many fear and detest.write an detailed article with subheadings, keep names of scholars, give
quotes, highlight keywords

Exploring the Relationship Between Equality and Justice: Theoretical Perspectives

The relationship between equality and justice is a subject of extensive debate in political theory.
Different interpretations of these principles lead to varied conclusions about what constitutes a just
society. This discussion often revolves around the views of prominent philosophers like Aristotle, F.A.
Hayek, John Rawls, and L.T. Hobhouse.

Aristotle's Perspective: Justice as Proportional Equality

Aristotle's conception of justice is rooted in the idea that justice involves treating equals equally and
unequals unequally. He argued that:

"Justice consists in treating equals equally and unequals unequally."

Aristotle believed that to determine what is just, one must first identify who are "equals" and
"unequals" in a given context. His concern was that individuals who are equal in one respect might
mistakenly assume they should be equal in all respects. For instance, equal citizens might believe they
deserve equal power, prestige, and wealth. When such expectations are unmet, it may lead to feelings
of deprivation and injustice, potentially resulting in rebellion.
Aristotle cautioned that:

"Those who are equal in one respect, are inclined to believe that they should be equal in all
respects."

According to Aristotle, the state should avoid promoting the idea of absolute equality to maintain
societal peace. This perspective implies that a stable society requires a recognition of differing
statuses and roles, thus preventing the promotion of radical equality.

Printed using Save ChatGPT as PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 2/4
 F.A. Hayek's Libertarianism: Justice and the Mirage of Equality

F.A. Hayek, an influential Austrian philosopher, criticized the concept of social justice in his work Law,
Legislation, and Liberty:

"Justice is in fact a characteristic of human conduct; a society cannot be just or unjust."

Hayek argued that social justice is a "mirage" and that justice should be viewed as a procedural
matter. He believed that:

"If liberty is curtailed in the interest of equality, it would lead to widespread tension and
dispute on the question of unjust distribution of life's goods."

According to Hayek, justice is not about achieving social equality but about ensuring that individuals
have the freedom to pursue their own interests. He championed libertarianism, which asserts that
capable individuals should face no impediments to their advancement. Libertarianism supports
procedural justice, where the focus is on the fairness of the processes rather than the outcomes. It
emphasizes:

"The function of the state is confined to ensuring that nobody harms others' interests by
force or fraud."

Libertarians argue that the state's role should be limited to maintaining a framework of rules that
prevents harm, leaving the distribution of resources to the market.

John Rawls's Egalitarianism: The Justice of Equality

John Rawls, a major figure in modern political theory, approached justice differently. In his seminal
work A Theory of Justice, Rawls argued that:

"Justice is the first virtue of social institutions, as truth is of systems of thought."

Rawls posited that egalitarianism is essential for justice. He believed that inequalities are only
justifiable if they benefit the least advantaged members of society. Rawls introduced the concept of
"justice as fairness", which includes:

1. Liberty Principle: Each person should have equal rights to the most extensive basic liberties
compatible with similar liberties for others.
2. Difference Principle: Social and economic inequalities are acceptable only if they benefit the
least advantaged members of society.

For Rawls, a just society must ensure that the poor and disadvantaged have opportunities for
advancement, in contrast to the libertarian view. Egalitarianism demands a system where:

"Inequalities need any justification, and these must show how the situation benefits the
least advantaged."

This perspective is opposed to maintaining the status quo and argues for substantive justice—a
focus on improving the conditions of the less privileged.

L.T. Hobhouse: The Ambivalence Towards Equality

Printed using Save ChatGPT as PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 3/4
 L.T. Hobhouse highlighted the tension between justice and equality in his work The Elements of Social
Justice:

"Justice is a name to which every knee will bow. Equality is a word which many fear and
detest."

Hobhouse’s observation underscores the broader societal reluctance towards absolute equality. While
justice is widely accepted as a desirable principle, equality is often contested, revealing deep-seated
fears about radical changes to social hierarchies and distributions.

Conclusion

The discussion of equality and justice is complex and varies significantly among different philosophical
traditions. Aristotle’s approach emphasizes proportional equality and the dangers of assuming equal
status in all respects. Hayek’s libertarianism rejects the notion of social justice, focusing on procedural
fairness and individual freedom. In contrast, Rawls’s egalitarianism argues for a justice that improves
the condition of the disadvantaged, challenging existing inequalities. Hobhouse’s reflections reveal
the societal ambivalence towards the concept of equality, despite its connection to justice. These
perspectives provide a rich framework for understanding the ongoing debates about how best to
achieve a just society.
ChatGPT can make mistakes. Check important info.

Printed using Save ChatGPT as PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 4/4