Editing Social justice (section)

== Contemporary theory ==

=== Philosophical perspectives ===

==== Cosmic values ====

[[Hunter Lewis]]' work promoting natural healthcare and sustainable economies advocates for [[Conservation (ethic)|conservation]] as a key premise in social justice. His manifesto on [[sustainability]] ties the continued thriving of human life to real conditions, the environment supporting that life, and associates injustice with the detrimental effects of [[unintended consequences]] of human actions. Quoting classical Greek thinkers like [[Epicurus]] on the good of pursuing happiness, Hunter also cites ornithologist, naturalist, and philosopher [[Alexander Skutch]] in his book Moral Foundations:

{{blockquote|The common feature which unites the activities most consistently forbidden by the moral codes of civilized peoples is that by their very nature they cannot be both habitual and enduring, because they tend to destroy the conditions which make them possible.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.anh-usa.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Sustainability-the-Complete-Concept1.pdf |author = Hunter Lewis |title = Sustainability, The Complete Concept, Environment, Healthcare, and Economy |date = 14 October 2009 |publisher = ChangeThis |access-date = 23 January 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304090801/http://www.anh-usa.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Sustainability-the-Complete-Concept1.pdf |archive-date = 4 March 2016 }}</ref>}}

Pope Benedict XVI cites [[Teilhard de Chardin]] in a vision of the cosmos as a 'living host'<ref>{{cite news |url=http://ncronline.org/news/ecology/pope-cites-teilhardian-vision-cosmos-living-host |author = John Allen Jr. |title = Ecology – The first stirring of an 'evolutionary leap' in late Jesuit's official standing? |date = 28 July 2009 |newspaper = National Catholic Reporter |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120824050226/http://ncronline.org/news/ecology/pope-cites-teilhardian-vision-cosmos-living-host |archive-date = 24 August 2012}}</ref> embracing an understanding of ecology that includes humanity's relationship to others, that pollution affects not just the natural world but interpersonal relations as well. Cosmic harmony, justice and peace are closely interrelated:

{{blockquote|If you want to cultivate peace, protect creation.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1341681?eng=y/ |author = Sandro Magister |title = Benedict XVI to the Diplomats: Three Levers for Lifting Up the World |date = 11 January 2010 |publisher = chiesa, Rome |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304083309/http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1341681?eng=y%2F |archive-date = 4 March 2016}}</ref>}}

In ''The Quest for Cosmic Justice'', [[Thomas Sowell]] writes that seeking utopia, while admirable, may have disastrous effects if done without strong consideration of the economic underpinnings that support contemporary society.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Sowell |first1=Thomas |title=The quest for cosmic justice |publisher=Simon & Schuster |isbn=0-684-86463-0 |edition=1st Touchstone|date=5 February 2002 }}</ref>

==== John Rawls ====
{{Main|John Rawls}}

Political philosopher [[John Rawls]] draws on the [[utilitarian]] insights of [[Jeremy Bentham|Bentham]] and [[John Stuart Mill|Mill]], the [[social contract]] ideas of [[John Locke]], and the [[categorical imperative]] ideas of [[Immanuel Kant|Kant]]. His first statement of principle was made in ''A Theory of Justice'' where he proposed that, "Each person possesses an inviolability founded on justice that even the welfare of society as a whole cannot override. For this reason justice denies that the loss of freedom for some is made right by a greater good shared by others."<ref>John Rawls, A Theory of Justice (2005 reissue), Chapter 1, "Justice as Fairness" – 1. The Role of Justice, pp. 3–4</ref> A [[deontological]] proposition that echoes Kant in framing the moral good of justice in [[Moral absolutism|absolutist]] terms. His views are definitively restated in ''[[Political Liberalism]]'' where society is seen "as a fair system of co-operation over time, from one generation to the next".<ref>John Rawls, ''Political Liberalism'' 15 (Columbia University Press 2003)</ref>

All societies have a basic structure of social, economic, and political institutions, both formal and informal. In testing how well these elements fit and work together, Rawls based a key test of legitimacy on the theories of social contract. To determine whether any particular system of collectively enforced social arrangements is legitimate, he argued that one must look for agreement by the people who are subject to it, but not necessarily to an objective notion of justice based on coherent ideological grounding. Not every citizen can be asked to participate in a poll to determine his or her consent to every proposal in which some degree of coercion is involved, so one has to assume that all citizens are reasonable. Rawls constructed an argument for a two-stage process to determine a citizen's hypothetical agreement:
* The citizen agrees to be represented by X for certain purposes, and, to that extent, X holds these powers as a [[trustee]] for the citizen.
* X agrees that enforcement in a particular social context is legitimate. The citizen, therefore, is bound by this decision because it is the function of the trustee to represent the citizen in this way.
This applies to one person who represents a small group (e.g., the organiser of a social event setting a dress code) just as it does to national governments, which are ultimate trustees, holding representative powers for the benefit of all citizens within their territorial boundaries. Governments that fail to provide for [[social welfare|welfare]] of their citizens according to the principles of justice are not legitimate. To emphasise the general principle that justice should rise from the people and not be dictated by the law-making powers of governments, Rawls asserted that, "There is ... a general presumption against imposing legal and other restrictions on conduct without sufficient reason. But this presumption creates no special priority for any particular liberty."<ref>John Rawls, Political Liberalism 291–92 (Columbia University Press 2003)</ref> This is support for an unranked set of liberties that reasonable citizens in all states should respect and uphold&nbsp;— to some extent, the list proposed by Rawls matches the normative human rights that have international recognition and direct enforcement in some nation states where the citizens need encouragement to act in a way that fixes a greater degree of equality of outcome. According to Rawls, the basic liberties that every good society should guarantee are:
* [[Freedom of thought]];
* Liberty of conscience as it affects social relationships on the grounds of religion, philosophy, and morality;
* Political liberties (e.g., representative democratic institutions, [[freedom of speech]] and the [[freedom of the press|press]], and [[freedom of assembly]]);
* [[Freedom of association]];
* Freedoms necessary for the liberty and integrity of the person (namely: freedom from [[slavery]], freedom of movement and a reasonable degree of freedom to choose one's occupation); and
* Rights and liberties covered by the [[rule of law]].

==== Thomas Pogge ====
[[File:2014-01-08 Thomas Pogge 4737-cropped.JPG|thumb|upright|[[Thomas Pogge]]]]
[[Thomas Pogge]]'s arguments pertain to a standard of social justice that creates [[human rights defender|human rights deficits]]. He assigns responsibility to those who actively cooperate in designing or imposing the social institution, that the order is foreseeable as harming the global poor and is reasonably avoidable.  Pogge argues that social institutions have a [[negative duty]] to not harm the poor.<ref>{{cite web |last1 = James |first1 = Nickel |title = Human Rights |url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rights-human/ |website = stanford.edu |publisher = The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |access-date = 10 February 2015 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1 = Pogge |first1 = Thomas Pogge |title = World Poverty and Human Rights |url=http://thomaspogge.com/books/world-poverty-human-rights/ |website = thomaspogge.com |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150919070037/http://thomaspogge.com/books/world-poverty-human-rights/ |archive-date = 19 September 2015}}</ref>

Pogge speaks of "institutional cosmopolitanism" and assigns responsibility to institutional schemes<ref>{{cite journal |last1 = North |first1 = James |title = The Resource Privilege |url=http://www.thenation.com/article/181724/resource-privilege# |journal = The Nation |access-date = 10 February 2015 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150210065716/http://www.thenation.com/article/181724/resource-privilege |archive-date = 10 February 2015|date = 23 September 2014 }}</ref> for deficits of human rights.  An example given is [[slavery]] and third parties.  A third party should not recognize or enforce [[slavery]].  The institutional order should be held responsible only for deprivations of human rights that it establishes or authorizes.  The current institutional design, he says, systematically harms developing economies by enabling corporate tax evasion,<ref>{{cite web |last1 = Pogge |first1 = Thomas |title = Human Rights and Just Taxation – Global Financial Transparency |url=http://thomaspogge.com/human-rights-and-just-taxation-global-financial-transparency/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150210074345/http://thomaspogge.com/human-rights-and-just-taxation-global-financial-transparency/ |archive-date = 10 February 2015}}</ref> illicit financial flows, corruption, trafficking of people and weapons. [[Joshua Cohen (philosopher)|Joshua Cohen]] disputes his claims based on the fact that some poor countries have done well with the current institutional design.<ref>{{cite book |editor=Alison M. Jaggar |title = Thomas Pogge and His Critics |date = 2010 |publisher = Polity Press |location = Cambridge |isbn=978-0-7456-4258-1}}</ref> Elizabeth Kahn argues that some of these responsibilities{{vague|date=April 2017}} should apply globally.<ref>{{cite journal |last1 = Kahn |first1 = Elizabeth |title = Global Economic Justice: A Structural Approach |journal = Public Reason |date = June–December 2012 |volume = 4 |issue = 1–2 |pages = 48–67 }}</ref>

==== United Nations ====

The United Nations calls social justice "an underlying principle for peaceful and prosperous coexistence within and among nations.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.un.org/en/events/socialjusticeday/index.shtml|title=World Day of Social Justice, 20 February|website=www.un.org|language=EN|access-date=2019-11-08}}</ref>

The United Nations' 2006 document ''Social Justice in an Open World: The Role of the United Nations'', states that "Social justice may be broadly understood as the fair and compassionate distribution of the fruits of economic growth{{nbsp}}..."<ref name="un">{{cite web |title = Social Justice in an Open World: The Role of the United Nations", The International Forum for Social Development, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Division for Social Policy and Development, ST/ESA/305 |publisher = United Nations |location = New York |year = 2006 |url=https://www.un.org/esa/socdev/documents/ifsd/SocialJustice.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170829123826/http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/documents/ifsd/SocialJustice.pdf |archive-date = 29 August 2017}}</ref>{{rp|16}}

The term "social justice" was seen by the U.N. "as a substitute for the protection of human rights [and] first appeared in United Nations texts during the second half of the 1960s. At the initiative of the Soviet Union, and with the support of developing countries, the term was used in the Declaration on Social Progress and Development, adopted in 1969."<ref name="un" />{{rp|52}}

The same document reports, "From the comprehensive global perspective shaped by the United Nations Charter and the [[Universal Declaration of Human Rights]], neglect of the pursuit of social justice in all its dimensions translates into de facto acceptance of a future marred by violence, repression and chaos."<ref name="un" />{{rp|6}} The report concludes, "Social justice is not possible without strong and coherent [[redistribution of income and wealth|redistributive policies]] conceived and implemented by public agencies."<ref name="un" />{{rp|16}}

The same UN document offers a concise history: "[T]he notion of social justice is relatively new. None of history's great philosophers—not Plato or Aristotle, or Confucius or Averroes, or even Rousseau or Kant—saw the need to consider justice or the redress of injustices from a social perspective. The concept first surfaced in Western thought and political language in the wake of the industrial revolution and the parallel development of the socialist doctrine. It emerged as an expression of protest against what was perceived as the capitalist [[exploitation of labor]] and as a focal point for the development of measures to improve the human condition. It was born as a revolutionary slogan embodying the ideals of progress and fraternity. Following the revolutions that shook Europe in the mid-1800s, social justice became a rallying cry for progressive thinkers and political activists.... By the mid-twentieth century, the concept of social justice had become central to the ideologies and programs of virtually all the leftist and centrist political parties around the world{{nbsp}}..."<ref name="un" />{{rp|11–12}}

Another key area of human rights and social justice is the United Nations's defense of children's rights worldwide. In 1989, the Convention on the Rights of the Child was adopted and available for signature, ratification and accession by General Assembly resolution 44/25.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web|title=OHCHR {{!}} Convention on the Rights of the Child|url=https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/crc.aspx|access-date=2020-12-21|website=www.ohchr.org}}</ref> According to [[Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights|OHCHR]], this convention entered into force on 2 September 1990. This convention upholds that all states have the obligation to "protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation, including sexual abuse."<ref name=":0" />