Theory of justice and social rights

The notion of justice has always played a very important role in any human society, being one of the fundamental ethical categories. After all, different social groups make a different contribution to the economic and social life of the society and play a different role in it, but a certain minimum of economic resources should be guaranteed to everyone without exception. The theory of justice is designed to analyze this rather complex concept, which, on the one hand, requires proportionality and, on the other hand, equality.

This contradiction in the definition of social justice caused criticism from the right-liberal economists and ideologists. They found the social ideal incompatible with market principles, and also declared that it was opposed to competition and freedom. The theory of justice, originated in the 70s of the last century, was an attempt to combine and balance these seemingly irreconcilable concepts. It became the basis of this phenomenon in political and social philosophy, like left-wing liberalism.

The main components of fairness are honesty, understood as an unselfish and honest procedure for distributing the necessary benefits based on the modern version of the good old theory of the social contract, and the so-called "veil of ignorance". The latter term means that people who decide on an equitable distribution must first of all strive to protect the most disadvantaged people, for this they must be put in such a situation that they do not know what social position they will take and what benefits they will get. The author of this concept was John Rawls. "The theory of justice" - this is one of the most brilliant books of this thinker. "The desire for equality is not only rational, it is the most natural instinct of a reasonable person," the philosopher believes, "inequality can only be tolerated if it alleviates the hardships of the poorest."

The book by John Rawls gave impetus not only to the discussions of scientists, but also to the development of new theories in the field of human rights. In particular, human rights defenders began to pay more attention to social rights and their provision. The theory of justice, reconciling the concepts of freedom and social equality, led to a clearer definition of freedom as such. "Freedom for" began to be understood not only as freedom to choose a government, religious beliefs or join any of the collectives, but also to have economic rights. And the concept of "freedom from" includes not only such components as freedom from slavery and torture, but also from hunger.

The theory of justice also very rigidly raises the question of whether the rights of the individual can be limited to the public good, and responds negatively to it. John Rawls believes that man, as Immanuel Kant said, can not be a means, but only a goal, and therefore his rights and freedoms can not be reduced for the sake of social well-being or peace. On the other hand, the list of individual rights includes rights to a decent standard of living, which must be provided by the state.

With all the shortcomings and conventions of the Harvard scientist's concept, his main findings were picked up by the most famous international lawyers and human rights activists. Human rights are indivisible, they argue, and therefore people living in fear of repression of freedom, and people living without social protection, are equally victims of human rights violations. Their long experience proves how right Rawls was. The theory of justice has in many ways been confirmed by practice - violations of human rights are constantly creating a problem of poverty, and poverty leads to new violations and violence. After all, each of us deserves the same level of opportunities, and the same standard of living.