Intelligent, thoughtful essay by Namit Arora on distributive economic justice: libertarian, meritocratic, egalitarian. (emphasis added)
In Rawlsian terms, the problem in America is not that a minority has grown super rich, but that for decades now, it has done so to the detriment of the lower social classes. The big question is: why does the majority in a seemingly free society tolerate this, and even happily vote against its own economic interests? A plausible answer is that it is under a self-destructive meritocratic spell that sees social outcomes as moral desert—a spell at least as old as the American frontier but long since repurposed by the corporate control of public institutions and the media: news, film, TV, publishing, etc. Rather than move towards greater fairness and egalitarianism, it promotes a libertarian gospel of the free market with minimal regulation, taxation, and public safety nets. What would it take to break this spell?
Related posts:
Daniel T. Rodgers on equality and inequality
Ezra Klein on inequality
Income inequality and American politics
Inequality and the financial crisis
The new economic reality
Union busting and the inequality of wealth
Life expectancy of the rich and the poor
The end of the American dream?
Resources:
Image: Alexian Brothers AIDS Ministry
Namit Arora, What Do We Deserve?, 3 Quarks Daily, March 28, 2011
John Rawls, A Theory of Justice
Michael Sandel, Justice: What’s the Right Thing to Do?
Daniel T. Rodgers, Age of Fracture
Sorry, comments are closed for this post.