What principles of Justice are underlying Democracy?

Résumé du document

According to Montesquieu, ?real equality [is] the very soul of a democracy? . In other terms, democracy is an ideal aimed at lowering inequalities and improving the well-being of the great majority of people. Nevertheless, as pointed out by Arthur Okun in his book Equality and Efficiency: The Big Trade-off, we remain still quite far away from reaching this ideal today in most cases. In the first chapter of his book, A. Okun stresses the contradictions of the American democracy, what he calls the ?double standard of a capitalist democracy?.

...

The democratic ideal actually comes into conflict with today's growing economic and social inequalities. This conflict is all the more worrying since the society is becoming richer and more powerful. For instance, in the USA, ?statistics show that the richest 1 percent of the US citizens own 40 percent of the total property of the country, while 80 percent of US citizens own just 16 percent? . Moreover, the trend is not likely to be downward. Instead, according to the same statistics, ?since the 1990s, 40 percent of the increased wealth went into the pockets of the rich minority, while only 1 percent went to [...]

Extraits

[...] Contrary to what utilitarians argue, what matters is not how utility is distributed but instead, how the primary goods are distributed. By “primary goods”, we understand the means which permit each individual to pursue his own objectives. Thus, primary goods in Rawls' view are defined as regards the person's needs which themselves depend no more on each individual's preferences and desires but instead on each individual's status of free and equal citizen. Justice as impartiality refers to a moral ideal of solidarity between people. Thus, justice as fairness is likely to be the basis of the democratic ideal. [...]

[...] Available from the World Wide Web: (http://www.ac-versailles.fr/PEDAGOGI/ses/vie- ses/regles/Accompagnement/term_idin_sav1d.htm#1) - “Utilitarian Ethics”, North Carolina Wesleyan College's website. Available from the World Wide Web: (http://faculty.ncwc.edu/toconnor/415/415lect07.htm) Montesquieu, The Spirit Of the Laws (1748), Vol. I & II, translated by Thomas Nugent, New York : Hafner Publishing Company, Vol. p Arthur M. Okun, Equality and Efficiency : The Big Trade-off, Washington, D.C. : The Brookings Institution, p Vernellia R. Randall, Widening Gap between Ric hand Poor in China's Report on US Human Rights Record in 2000, Information State Office of China's State Council. [...]

[...] Walzer, provides another insight into the concepts of social justice and equality. According to Walzer, each type of goods is subject to differential distributive criteria. For instance, medicines should be distributed according to need, honours according to merit and wealth should depend on the market organization, on luck and on qualification. As regards the approach privileged by analytical Marxism, some authors like John Roemer argue that exploitation is unjust if it is the result of an unequal access to the resources of production. [...]

[...] Inequalities at work have become quite important and worrying today. For instance we can mention differential treatments between different generations, differences between men and women on the labour market, especially as wages are concerned, differences resulting from different levels of diplomas and human capital, differences between job security and insecurity, and so on. Today's inequalities are likely to be more and more difficult to grapple with. Nevertheless, facing all these differences and dealing with them is the current essential issue. [...]

[...] Meanwhile, these “affirmative actions” policies are still very controversial. To what extent is it to favour some minority people at the detriment of individuals from other groups? Don't the given advantages discredit those we want to help? In Canada and in Australia, affirmative actions are definitely aimed at guaranteeing actual equality for all the different populations, what makes these policies clearly part of the democratic process of the Welfare State. But still some limits should also be pointed out there. [...]