B.M. Academia help you to make your work easy . So here we are with notes of

Social justice political theory

Many philosophers has described justice in different ways

In ancient India justice is associated with maintaining Dharma
In china, Confucius ( a philosopher) argues that king should maintain justice by punishing wrong-doers and rewarding the virtuous
In the fourth century B.C. in Athens, Greece, Plato explored the concept of justice in his work, The Republic.
The notion that justice involves giving each person their due remains a fundamental aspect of our contemporary understanding of justice.
German philosopher Immanuel Kant argued that human beings possess dignity. If everyone is granted dignity, they should have the opportunity to develop their talents and pursue their goals.
Justice demands that we give due and equal consideration to all individuals.

One principle of justice is treating equals equally, based on the idea that all individuals share certain characteristics as human beings and therefore deserve equal rights and treatment.
Important rights in most liberal democracies today include civil rights (such as the rights to life, liberty, and property), political rights (like the right to vote), and social rights (such as equal opportunities).
This principle requires that people should not be discriminated against based on class, caste, race, or gender.

Equal treatment is not the only principle of justice.
There are situations where treating everyone equally might be unjust.
If everyone starts with equal rights, justice might mean rewarding people in proportion to their effort and quality of work.
It is fair to reward different kinds of work differently, considering factors like effort, skills required, and potential dangers involved.
Justice in society requires balancing equal treatment with proportionality.

Another principle of justice is recognizing and addressing the special needs of individuals when distributing rewards or duties.
This principle extends the idea of equal treatment by acknowledging that people who are unequal in certain respects may need different treatment.
People with special needs or disabilities may deserve special help.
Factors like physical disabilities, age, or lack of access to education or healthcare are grounds for special treatment in many countries.
In India, the Constitution provides for reservations in government jobs and educational institutions for Scheduled Castes and Tribes due to social discrimination.

Social justice also involves the fair distribution of goods and services, both within and between societies.
Addressing serious economic or social inequalities may require redistributing resources to create a level playing field for all citizens.
Social justice demands that people be treated equally by laws and policies and that they enjoy basic equality in life conditions and opportunities.
Differences of opinion on how to distribute resources and ensure equal access to education and jobs can ignite strong emotions and sometimes even lead to violence.

Renowned political philosopher John Rawls has argued that there is a rational basis for recognizing the need to assist the least privileged members of society.
John Rawls suggests that to establish fair and just rules, we should imagine ourselves making decisions about society’s organization without knowing our own position within it.
He calls this the ‘veil of ignorance.’ In this scenario, people would make decisions based on their own interests, but since they don’t know their future status, they would consider the perspective of the worst-off.
This approach would not disadvantage those born into less privileged sections of society.
While it is challenging to erase our identities and think under a veil of ignorance, it is equally difficult for most people to be self-sacrificing and share their good fortune with strangers.
The strength of the ‘veil of ignorance’ concept is that it expects people to act rationally and choose what they believe is in their best interest
Rawls therefore argues that rational thinking, not morality, could lead us to be fair and judge impartially regarding how to distribute the benefits and burdens of a society.

When a society experiences significant and persistent disparities between the wealthy and powerful and those who are marginalized and deprived, it reflects a lack of social justice.
Justice does not require complete equality and uniformity in people’s lifestyles.
Various governments and international organizations, such as the World Health Organization, have developed different methods to assess people’s basic needs.
Ensuring that people’s basic needs are met is a responsibility of democratic governments. However, providing these essentials to all citizens can be a significant challenge, especially in countries like India with a large population of impoverished individuals.
In India, different political groups advocate for various approaches to assist marginalized populations, such as the rural or urban poor, and debate the effectiveness of different schemes.

Proponents of the free market argue that minimal state interference in markets will lead to a fair distribution of benefits and responsibilities in society.
However, not all free market advocates support completely unregulated markets. Many now accept certain restrictions, such as state intervention to ensure a basic minimum standard of living for everyone, enabling fair competition.
One argument in favor of market distribution is that it offers more choices.
Another common argument is that private enterprises often provide higher quality services than government institutions, though these services may be unaffordable for the poor.
While arguments exist on both sides, free markets tend to favor the already privileged.
In a democratic society, disagreements about distribution and justice are inevitable and beneficial, as they encourage the examination of different perspectives and the rational defense of one’s views.
Politics involves negotiating these disagreements through debate.