SOCIAL JUSTICE THEORY: FOUNDATIONS, ELABORATIONS, AND
APPLICATION OF A THEORY OF JUSTICE
By Lucas Salazar
In this essay Salazar explores the extent to which Political Action and Democ-
ratic Participation, as basic tenets of democratic life, are grounded on the con-
cepts of social justice and human rights.
Introduction
The theory of social justice is a topic of
great dispute. Who and what define social
justice? Consider the array of political
alignments within the members of your
neighborhood, state, nation, and world. It
seems that most people claim to advocate
for social justice and human rights. How
is it then, that people can come to such
different conclusions about the meanings
of social justice and human rights and,
also, about the tactics used to advance
these widely embraced ideals? This ques-
tion may define the history of politics
within a democratic framework. This es-
say approaches these differences by ex-
ploring the foundations of social justice
theory. Two matters of great importance
to a theory of social justice are discussed:
the nature of humankind and social sci-
ence methodology. To be clear on these
two points, consider for the first Lakoff’s
(2004) idea of the “strict” vs. “nurturing”
parenting methods, which he generally
associated with conservativism (for the
former) and liberalism (for the latter).
Each of these positions is born from a
unique world-view; the conservative be-
lieving that children come into the world
ripe with sin and therefore need discipline
and punishment to mold them into socially
responsible agents, the liberal position
making the fundamentally opposite as-
sumption that children come into the
CS&P Vol 3 Num 2
world innocent, needing care and encour-
agement to blossom into socially respon-
sible agents. The roots of these sentiments
regarding human nature are explored as
reflected in psychological theory of the
last century. For the matter of social sci-
ence methodology, consider the hypotheti-
cally impoverished state of the social sci-
ences if modernism, as embodied in posi-
tivist methodology, did not find a chal-
lenge in postmodernism. Postmodernism
and post-positivism expanded methodo-
logical legitimacy and, thus, offered scien-
tific credibility to those who did not be-
lieve Skinner’s objectivity was the only
way to come to scientific conclusions
(Trochim, 2001, p .18). The linkages be-
tween these concerns of social science
methodology and social justice are ex-
panded on below. Additionally, social jus-
tice theory is discussed utilizing Mitchell’s
(2003) triple paradigm approach, which
considers social justice as a matter of re-
distribution, recognition, and procedure.
Finally, an example of a recent political
campaign provides material to which so-
cial justice theory is applied. First, what
does the field of psychology tell us about
the nature of humankind?
Nature of Humankind
Many conflicting theories of the psychol-
ogy of humankind have emerged in the
last century. Unavoidably, the theorists
and practitioners who dwell on the prob-
lems of psychology attempt to describe
and account for the behavior of humans by
May 2005
109 Social Justice Theory
making rules and guidelines for the asso-
ciated phenomena. One specific phe-
nomenon studied in psychology, human
nature, has led to the fractionalization of
the field into certain schools of thought.
The most basic of these, behavioral psy-
chology, psychoanalytic psychology, and
humanistic psychology (also referred to as
first, second, and third force psychology
respectively) have led to dozens of meth-
ods of psychotherapy. The major trend
among contemporary practitioners in the
field is to have an eclectic approach that,
as a recent informational flyer of such a
psychologist indicates, “combine[s] evi-
dence-based conventional, complementary
and alternative approaches to optimize
treatment results” (Primary Document 1).
These widely varying approaches to ther-
apy indicate that there exists a great deal
of consternation about the nature of men
and women. Yet, there are consistencies
across the array of psychologies in terms
of the single component of human psy-
chology that is of great importance to one
exploring a theory of social justice – that
is, in Freudian terms, the pleasure princi-
ple.
The term pleasure principal is the
most immediately stimulating of the dif-
ferent versions (as in psychoanalysis vs.
humanism) of this concept in that it pro-
vides easy epistemic accessibility. Freud
posited that civilization was in conflict
with the pleasure principal in that it re-
stricted one of humankind’s most basic
inclinations toward aggressiveness, or
what Freud termed the “death instinct”.
Only dominant primal men have been able
to obtain a true congruence with the pleas-
ure principle, which also meant an exercis-
ing of aggressiveness at will. Eventually,
men decided to bond together for greater
security from the elements and thus com-
munal life was advanced, though not
Culture Society & Praxis
CS&P
without a price for the few dominant men.
In regard to communal life Freud wrote:
…men are not gentle creatures who want to
be loved, and who at the most can defend
themselves if they are attacked; they are, on
the contrary, creatures among whose instinc-
tual endowments is to be reckoned to a
powerful share of aggression. As a result,
their neighbor is for them not only a poten-
tial helper or sexual object, but also some-
one who tempts them to satisfy their aggres-
siveness on him, to exploit his capacity for
work without compensation, to use him
sexually without his consent, to seize his
possessions, to humiliate him, to cause him
pain, to torture and kill him. Homo homini
lupus1 (Freud, 1961, pp. 68-69).
Thus, Freud is adamant in his estimation
of the innate goodness, or rather evilness,
of humankind. Humanistic psychology, as
exemplified by Carl Rogers, takes a dif-
ferent approach to the interpretation of the
pleasure principle.
In humanistic psychology, the
equivalent of the psychological mecha-
nism that Freud called the pleasure princi-
ple is called the “organismic valuing proc-
ess”. This is defined as, “the capacity for
receiving feedback information that en-
ables the organism continually to adjust its
behavior and reactions so as to achieve the
maximum possible self-enhancement”
(Rogers, 1983, p. 264). The main differ-
ence between the two theorists being that
Freud believed congruence with the pleas-
ure principle led to destructive ends while
Rogers believed that congruence with the
organismic valuing process led to con-
structive ends. In contrast to Freud,
Rogers believed that humanistic methods
led to more communal ends, he states,
“sensitivity to others is positively valued.
The client comes to appreciate others for
what they are, just as she has come to ap-
preciate herself for what she is” (p. 266).
1
Man is a wolf to man.
CS&P Lucas Salazar
Therefore, humanism stands in stark con-
trast to Freudian psychoanalysis in its es-
timation of the nature of man.
First force, or behavioral, psychol-
ogy utilizes the principle of reinforcement
to explain behavior. The important differ-
ence here from the other previous schools
of psychology is that the behavior of an
organism is explained objectively; it is not
concerned with the phenomenological as-
pects of being. Behaviorism says that the
“history of reinforcement” is the determin-
ing factor in the behavior of an organism.
Therefore, things such as choice and free
will are rejected in this school of psychol-
ogy; one need merely know one’s history
in order to understand one’s current be-
havior. Differences in those with similar
histories of reinforcement are attributed to
genetics. This biological and objective
approach to psychology puts a great deal
of emphasis on the engineering of culture
in a way that reinforces behaviors condu-
cive to communal living. In B.F. Skin-
ner’s (1948) classic utopian novel, Walden
Two, he explains the theory and methods
used to design the utopia of which the be-
nevolence of the main character, Frazier,
is supposedly responsible. Frazier’s
statement of vision for humankind will
help to summarize the position of the be-
haviorists. Frazier states the following:
All that happens is contained in an original
plan, yet at every stage the individual seems
to be making choices and determining the
outcome. The same is true of Walden Two.
Our members are practically always doing
what they want to do – what they ‘choose’
to do – but we see to it that they will want to
do precisely the things that are best for
themselves and the community. Their be-
havior is determined, yet they’re free (pp.
296, 297).
A brief discussion of an additional branch
of psychology will prove useful in that it
will provide an historical context for the
CS&P Vol 3 Num 2
110
psychology of humankind. Eminent Rus-
sian psychologist, Lev Vygotsky worked
toward a social/cultural view of psychol-
ogy – Vygotsky was focused on process or
development in psychology. The hope
found within this branch of psychology,
developmental psychology, is that the na-
ture of man is in fact evolving. Berg ar-
ticulates this as follows:
Traditionally, it was thought that such things
as the family and the state always existed in
more or less their present form. Likewise,
one also tends to view the structure of the
mind as something universal and eternal.
To Vygotsky, however, both social struc-
tures and mental structures turn out to have
very definite historical roots, and are quite
specific products of certain levels of tool
development (in Vygotsky, 1978, p. 132).
Developmental psychology is mentioned
because it adds a historical dimension to
the nature of man, which is an essential
concept in any discussion of social justice.
The injustices that accompany the history
of the “progress” of western civilization
(e.g., genocide of various indigenous
groups of the Americas, exploitation of
workers and slaves to develop agriculture
and infrastructure, etc.) are evidence of
this. It is unpractical to eliminate history
from a discussion of social justice as
Rawls’ (1971) would like to attempt, via
his conception of the “original position” -
more discussion on Rawls below in the
section of social justice theory.
The goal of this discussion is to es-
tablish the “stuff” of social justice. What
concerns are of import to a theory of social
justice, but the ways in which people treat
one another? A reflection on natural ten-
dencies in behavior is essential to under-
standing these tendencies. It would seem
that if Rogers’ humanism were the accu-
rate conceptualization of human nature
that there would be no need for a theory of
justice – we would already be there. Ac-
May 2005
111 Social Justice Theory
cordingly, if Freud’s notion of the death
instinct reigned supreme, we may not be in
a position to talk about social justice at all
(rather, we may be scrambling to escape
each other’s “wolf like” tendencies).
Given Skinner’s conceptualization of be-
havior, we are just rats in a box anyway.
Hopefully, then, Vygotsky is right and we
are constantly in development and this de-
velopment includes an evolution to a
greater humanism vis-à-vis Rogers. Or, if
that is a naïve or ambitious hope, at the
very least may this development lead to
more advanced solutions in how to deal
with Freud’s death instinct in ways that do
not oppress others; that is, in ways that
promote, rather than inhibit social justice.
Social Science Methodology
The question of interest here is, “What
claims about reality will be admitted in the
discussion and creation of a just society?”
Fortunately, the answer to this question is
much more inclusive than it was 50 years
ago. The movement from positivism to
post-positivism that took place half way
through the 20th century (Trochim, p. 18)
took a great deal of the pretension out of
the social sciences; finally, more subjects
could be studied and without a rigid Skin-
nerian approach. Scientists such as Carl
Rogers gained prestige while his studies
focused on the subjective aspects of being.
Psychoanalysis continued to progress
with, what may have been to some scien-
tists, fantastic claims about the human ex-
perience such as Jung’s collective uncon-
scious and, also, found in his focus on
dreams. Currently, postmodernism has
greatly influenced the way business is
done in the training of students of the so-
cial sciences. As a matter of fact, the so-
cial science department of which I am a
part has, as an introductory text to the ma-
jor, a work entitled Post-Modernism and
the Social Sciences (Rosenau, 1992). To
guide this discussion, radical positivism
Culture Society & Praxis
CS&P
and radical postmodernism (according to
Wilbur) as two different approaches to the
social sciences are used to create an un-
derstanding of the potential threats that
social science poses to social justice. Both
approaches to social scientific inquiry in-
clude different methodologies and, there-
fore, epistemologies that, in the end, have
an influence on progress towards social
justice. By discussing the outcomes of
these two approaches to knowledge, it will
be possible to see the dangers in each,
thereby allowing a less rigid, in the case of
radical positivism, or more rigid, in the
case of radical postmodernism, approach
to emerge.
Positivism is the line of thought
that claims reality can be known by means
of the scientific method; it has run into
several problems historically. The eugen-
ics movement of the early 20th century is a
tragic example of what positivism led to:
further oppression of peoples of color and
other stigmatized groups through anti-
miscegenation laws, sterilization, and
standardized intelligence tests. The dan-
ger here lies, not only in hegemonic forces
(i.e., whose interests are involved in using
the science, as in Nazi concentration
camps or, more generally, white suprem-
acy), but also in the process of operation-
alization as a step in the process of social
scientific inquiry. If a tool is created and
judged valid, although in reality it is not a
valid tool, then large-scale atrocities can
ensue in the name of “good” science. Gal-
ton who coined the term eugenics was an
“apostle of quantification”; he felt that
anything could be measured (Gould,
1981). Thinking along these lines led to
research from Bean that indicated that Af-
rican Americans had an innately lower in-
telligence than whites, by crude measure-
ments of the skull – a process called cra-
niometry (p. 80). Thus, positivism has
suffered from a lack of humility, which
CS&P Lucas Salazar 112

has led to grave errors. Postmodernism is in thought and belief. In this sense it has
guilty of a similar crime, although in a dif- given voice to historically disenfranchised
ferent manner. people (i.e., peoples without “scientific”
Postmodernism is afraid to take a training), but it does not hold the standards
stand, except when someone is claiming that allow for a condemnation of an “un-
that they are right. This is not to say that just” order; it is too liberal with its relativ-
postmodernism has not offered a great ism to do so.
contribution to the social sciences in terms
of critique of positivism and a more gen- Figure 1 Wilbur’s Model of De-
eral broadening of social science method- velopmental Psychology
ology, but this is to say that postmodern-
ism poses an interesting conundrum. How
does a theory that does not make value
judgments work as a progressive force?
Postmodernism is not allowed to make
judgments, because of, as Wilbur (2000)
states, “…the standard postmodern claim
that all behavior is culturally relative and
socially constructed (p. x [10 in preface]).
This tendency toward radical relativism is
dangerous in that, in its radical sense, it
allows anyone to do anything. Wilbur
cites the danger of postmodern thought in
terms of narcissism; he considers post-
modernism as a “supermagnet for narcis-
sism”. In Ken Wilbur’s A Theory of Eve-
rything, he proposes a model of develop-
mental psychology (Figure 1) that views
development as a consistent decline in
ego-centrism. A characteristic of post-
modern thought, pluralism, is very ad-
vanced in terms of development; a plural-
ist has gone far to confront one’s egocen-
trism and narcissism. The problem here is
that, while acknowledging the plurality of
expression in the world, a pluralist will Source: Adapted from Ken Wilbur’s A Theory of
defend anyone on the basis of plurality Everything p. 21
itself, including one’s self. Therefore, it In summary, where positivism suffers
leads to an attitude of “don’t tell me what from a lack of humility so does postmod-
to do” that fights against all hierarchy ernism; both of these lines of thought are
when it is no illusion that the pluralists enveloped by narcissism.
developed to the point of relativistic
thought with a large degree of coherence, How is it, then, that the ideology
by way of hierarchy (or what Wilbur calls backing these approaches can be and be-
holarchy). Thus, in terms of policy deci- come more cautious - more humble?
sions, postmodernism embraces diversity Here, the concept of post-positivism and,

CS&P Vol 3 Num 2 May 2005

113 Social Justice Theory
more specifically, critical realism will be
useful. Critical realists are similar to posi-
tivists in that they believe that an external
reality exists to human subjectivity, but it
allows for the fallibility of science; it
states that, “all observation is fallible and
has error and all theory is reversible”
(Trochim, 2001, p. 19). Thus, in terms of
different approaches to social scientific
inquiry and their influence on society, it is
clear that positivist and postmodernist
epistemologies do not fit the bill in terms
of promoting social justice. Only a critical
realist orientation allows scientists to care-
fully guard knowledge that has accumu-
lated, while staying humble in light of new
evidence.
In sum, the concerns surrounding
conceptualizations of and practice in the
social and behavior sciences are important
to a theory of social justice. Just as Henry
Kissinger’s notion of history as the “mem-
ory of states” (in Zinn, 1999) functions as
a conceptualization to perpetuate power
disparities, radical positivism does the
same by restricting dissenting voices –
voices that do not relate in the language of
positivism. On the other hand, radical
postmodernism allows all voices, except
those that claim to hold the truth posi-
tively, to add to the tapestry of knowledge.
Can we be so naïve as to believe that one
claim about reality does not have more
value than another? The politics found
within the wall of the ivory tower, as em-
bodied in the debate between positivism
and postmodernism, lend insight into poli-
tics as practiced in the democratic sphere,
which invariably has implications regard-
ing a theory of justice.
Social Justice Theory
The theory of social justice as proposed by
Mitchell (2003) is based on the following
three components: resource distribution,
identity recognition and the procedures
Culture Society & Praxis
CS&P
involved in forging just conditions. She
identifies the three “paradigms” of social
justice theory as, “(re)distribution, recog-
nition, and procedural” (p. 2). Here fol-
lows a description and discussion of these
three approaches to achieving social jus-
tice.
The redistribution paradigm can be
viewed as a traditionally socialist ideal.
The basic idea here is that once everyone
in society has equal access to resources
that just conditions will emerge. Redistri-
bution is considered, mainly, with eco-
nomic or material equality with aims to
deconstruct class relations. Karl Marx
provided a grand theory of society, of
which a great part was based on the dis-
tributive paradigm for social justice. Marx
wrote:
Communism is the positive abolition of pri-
vate property, of human self-alienation, and
thus the real appropriation of human nature
through and for man. It is therefore the re-
turn of man himself as a social, i.e. really
human, being, a complete and conscious re-
turn which assimilates all the wealth of pre-
vious development (Marx, 1983, p. 149).
The criticism here is that redistribution
does not necessarily account for other
“currencies” that exist beyond the material
such as power resulting from privileged
identity (Mitchell, 2003; Young 1990;
Fraser and Honneth, 1997). Also, a doc-
trine of equality (equal distribution) is
suspect to injustice, because those needing
more may be denied it based on the argu-
ment of fairness as equal shares. Thus, the
distributive paradigm undermines histori-
cal realities that lead to disparities of privi-
lege by employing an ideal of equality vs.
an ideal of equity. The recognition para-
digm attempts to deal with some of these
contradictions.
The recognition paradigm cuts
through economic difference to focus on
difference as a concept in itself. The goal
CS&P Lucas Salazar
in the recognition paradigm is to eliminate
oppression, by deconstructing oppressive
social norms (Freire, 1970; Young, 1990;
Fraser and Honneth, 1997; Mitchell,
2003). Whereas redistribution charges the
government with the creation of a just so-
cial order, recognition calls all societal
entities to work on this problem from the
individual to the institutional. Thus, the
recognition paradigm of social justice en-
compasses class, placing it within a larger
context of difference.
The importance of the recognition
paradigm to social justice cannot be un-
derstated. In fact identity politics consti-
tutes issues of intense conflict. Ida B.
Wells-Barnett and W.E.B. Du Bois offer
strong African-American voices that attest
to the state of justice in terms of identity
politics in the late 19th and early 20th cen-
tury. Wells-Barnett (1889) wrote about
the “unspeakable barbarism” of white folk
involved in 12 lynchings, and in one case
the “perpetrator”, Samuel Hose, was
burned alive for killing his employer.
Only one of the “perpetrators”, aside from
Hose, that was lynched was charged with a
crime – that of assaulting a woman. In
times of such utter hostility to difference
the implications of identity politics are ob-
vious. Du Bois wrote of the “veil” that
African-Americans endured during this
time period, a burden that led to his notion
of “double-consciousness”. He wrote:
It is a peculiar sensation, this double-
consciousness, this sense of always looking
at one’s self through the eyes of others, of
measuring one’s soul by the tape of a world
that looks on in amused contempt and pity
(1996, p. 2).
And as a complementary quotation, in his
essay “The Souls of White Folk” he wrote
the following:
But when the black man begins to dispute
the white man’s title to certain alleged be-
quests of the Fathers in wage and position,
CS&P Vol 3 Num 2
114
authority and training; and when his attitude
toward charity is sullen anger rather than
humble jollity; when he insists on his human
right to swagger and swear and waste, - then
the spell is suddenly broken and the philan-
thropist is ready to believe that Negroes are
impudent…(Du Bois, 1920, p.19)
Thus, the moment the, what Scott (1992)
refers to as, “hidden transcript” was re-
vealed in the public sphere, a severe con-
sequence resulted and in the case of Afri-
can-Americans in U.S. history, it is clear
that this could mean one’s life.
Identity politics stretches much
further than race. Any identity may be
stigmatized and, once given this sort of
label, reduced to a subordinate status.
Goffman (1963) introduces his book S-
tigma with an example of “spoiled iden-
tity” whose main focus is not race, but dis-
figurement. Goffman cites a letter to a
support column written by a girl who was
born without a nose, who is coming of
age. She is interested to begin dating
boys, but is concerned about this prospect
because, for the most part, people are
scared of her. She concludes the letter by
asking if she should commit suicide.
Goffman proceeds to give a theoretical
explanation of the young girl’s predica-
ment. Goffman uses the terminology
“personal” and “social” identity to de-
scribe stigma, which provides an analogy
to Du Bois’ notion of double-
consciousness. The establishment of a
social identity, or a stereotype, regarding
the meanings of certain traits, complicates
the identities of both the African-
American and the disfigured youth. The
individuals in these scenarios must juggle
conception of self, or personal identity,
with the broader social identity that is
given to them by others.
The final paradigm identified by
Mitchell, the procedural paradigm, focuses
on the means to achieving the end of so-
May 2005
115 Social Justice Theory
cial justice. This paradigm describes the
set of rules necessary to acknowledge
when decision-making. The goal here is
to define a set of rules that will lead deci-
sion makers to unbiased decisions guided
by the ideal of fairness to all affected par-
ties. Thus, the focus is not that the end
products are not necessarily equal (or eq-
uitable) in this paradigm, but that the
manner in which a conclusion is reached
constitutes a just process (Mitchell, 2003;
Rawls, 1971). To further discuss the idea
of procedural justice, Young (1997) offers
the useful concept of “asymmetrical recip-
rocity”.
What is just decision-making but
moral decision-making? In Young’s cri-
tique of procedure in moral decision-
making, she makes it apparent that certain
processes will not lead to just results.
Young contests the philosophy of Seyla
Benhabib throughout her critique of Ben-
habib’s notion of “symmetrical reciproc-
ity”. Benhabib’s philosophy deems it pos-
sible and desirable to take on another’s
perspective as your own in the case of
solving a moral dilemma (i.e., it is desir-
able in the context of a moral dilemma to
“put yourself in the other’s shoes”).
Young believes that it is neither possible
nor desirable to attempt to achieve sym-
metry of perspectives, and furthermore,
that it will lead to immoral decisions be-
cause of the fallacy of the possibility of
pure reciprocity. In short, individuals
from different backgrounds have different
experiences that the other cannot fully re-
late with, thus to make this assumption
(that of understanding another’s position)
may be to invalidate a differing positional-
ity. Young explains the political implica-
tions of this theory here:
We make our moral and political judgments,
then, not only by taking account of one an-
other’s interests and perspectives, but also
by considering the collective social proc-
Culture Society & Praxis
CS&P
esses and relationships that lie between us
and which we have come to know together
by discussing the world (Young, 1997, p.
59).
The important thing to note here is that all
voices are included in the decision making
process as they are. Young’s take on
moral respect assures just process by man-
dating a practice of asymmetrical reciproc-
ity in dialog.
John Rawls (1971) also offers a
useful concept that exemplifies the proce-
dural paradigm of social justice. Rawls
creates the hypothetical situation where
decision-makers are ignorant to the posi-
tionality they will have when entering a
new world, what Rawls calls the “original
position”. Thus, it is in the best interest of
the decision-makers to create a just law in
this new world, because they are not aware
of what “suit” they are going to put on as
they step into this world. Rawls states,
“The idea of the original position is to set
up a fair procedure so that any principles
agreed to will be just” (p. 127).
In summary, the three paradigms
of social justice fuse to create a compre-
hensive framework for the currencies of
power, both subjective and objective, that
must be balanced in order to achieve a just
world and, also, the process through which
this balance may be achieved.
Application of Social Justice Theory
What a better time to write about the ap-
plication of social justice theory than elec-
tion time? In a few weeks the U.S. popu-
lace will vote to determine who will “run”
the country for the next four years. This is
a scary prospect with far reaching implica-
tions when considering the political ten-
sion mounting both intra and internation-
ally. On the other hand, this phenomenon
provides a rich example to which we may
apply the theories discussed above. Al-
though the primaries have passed, the
CS&P Lucas Salazar 116

campaign promises of Dennis Kucinich Point Action

will provide useful material for a discus-
sion about the application of social justice [1] Universal …establish a streamlined
theory. The goal here is to identify the Health Care national health insurance,
different goals of the Kucinich campaign with a Single Medicare For All. It would
and to discuss how they relate with the Payer Plan be publicly financed health
different paradigms for social justice ex- care, privately delivered. It
plained above. Tables assist in categoriz- would provide affordable
ing the content from a pamphlet (Primary prescription drugs, thanks
to bulk purchasing.
Document 2), which acts as the source of
information about Kucinich’s proposi- [2] Full Social A Kucinich administration
tions. It is important to note that there are Security Bene- will make that [full retire-
certain points that apply to more than one fits at Age 65 ment benefits] possible
paradigm, but I have used each point only through a progressive tax
one time utilizing my subjective judgment structure and reordered na-
as to which paradigm was most appropri- tional priorities.
ate for the point being categorized. The [6] Balance Since the purchasing power
paradigms will be discussed in the follow- Between of the minimum wage has
ing order: redistribution, recognition, and Workers and dropped 21% in two dec-
procedural. Corporations ades, it’s time for living
In terms of redistribution, the in- wages, not minimum
formation pamphlet indicates a few things. wages.
To begin, the document explains, in gen- And it’s time to reverse tax
eral terms, Kucinich’s “progressive vi- cuts that benefit the already
sion”. In this introduction it states two well-to-do, and retain an
things that indicate a desire to redistribute estate tax.
resources in a just manner: 1) “[It is] Time Investing $500 billion to
to counter control of corporations over our rebuild schools, roads,
politics, our economy, our resources, and bridges, ports, and sewage,
mass media.” 2) “Time for those who have water, and environmental
systems will do more to
much to help those who have little by
stimulate the economy than
maintaining a progressive tax structure.” tax breaks for the wealthy.
In the text that follows, ten points are
noted as actions that the Kucinich admini- [7]Guaranteed Pre-K and after-school pro-
stration would implement if elected. Al- Quality Educa- grams will get increased
though what is indicated in the pamphlet is tion, Pre-K funding, and the soaring
not as radical as what Marx proposed for through Col- costs of college will be re-
the restructuring of society, there are many lege versed.
actions that would lead to significant re- [8] A Renewed A Kucinich administration
structuring and, specifically, redistribution Commitment to will cut bloated and un-
of resources. Here is a list of actions Peace and Di- needed weaponry from a
quoted from the pamphlet that indicate plomacy military budget that now
some form of redistribution, which elabo- almost equals the military
rates on the statements made in the intro- spending of all other coun-
duction: tries combined.
Table 2. Redistribution Table The Kucinich peace divi-

CS&P Vol 3 Num 2 May 2005

117 Social Justice Theory
dend will be invested in
education, health care, envi-
ronmental clean-up, urban
infrastructure, Social Secu-
rity, veterans’ benefits, and
other pressing domestic
needs.
[9] Restored A Kucinich administration
Rural Commu- will break up agricultural
nities and Fam- monopolies and restore a
ily Farms strong, independent family
farm system with fair prices
for farmers and healthy
food for consumers.
Thus, it is apparent that the Kucinich ad-
ministration would work towards a more
equitable distribution of wealth and health
for the nation. Radical redistribution is
concerned with equal distribution and, as
the vision for Social Security entails,
Kucinich does not take that approach in
his campaign. It is apparent that his vision
strives to appropriate the resources that are
in accordance to one’s needs. The recog-
nition paradigm will add another dimen-
sion to Kucinich’s vision.
In terms of the recognition para-
digm for social justice, Kucinich includes
several actions in his plan that exemplify
this aspect of a just society. In the intro-
duction of the pamphlet it states, “[It is]
Time to look out upon the world for
friends, not enemies.” In this way
Kucinich envisions a world that is inclu-
sive and embracing rather than exclusive
and hostile. The recognition paradigm has
a similar goal, which is to make a world of
individuals who share in reciprocal rela-
tionships rather than oppressive ones.
Here follows a table that identifies some
of the points included in the pamphlet that
emphasize recognition:
Table 3. Recognition Table
Culture Society & Praxis
CS&P
Point Action
[5] Right In a Kucinich administration, a
to woman’s right to choose will be
Choose, protected as essential to personal
Privacy, privacy and gender equality.
and Civil Only those who agree to uphold
Rights Roe v. Wade will be nominated
for the Supreme Court.
Civil rights (and voting rights)
enforcement will be intensified.
Lesbians and gays will be af-
forded complete equality through-
out society.
Affirmative action will be main-
tained as a tool for racial and gen-
der equality.
It is clear that Kucinich focuses on an af-
firmative recognition policy, what Fraser
(1997) refers to as “mainstream multicul-
turalism”. That is, Kucinich’s policies
would provide protection under the law for
differences and it would protect the right
of women to choose what they will do
with their bodies. In the case of civil
rights, Kucinich proposes that resources be
used to ensure that the gains achieved for
minorities in the civil rights movement are
implemented, thereby increasing the status
of difference of individuals and groups.
Although this is positive in terms of ensur-
ing particular groups certain securities and
resources previously denied, it does not
shake the heart of identity politics, which
is difference itself. Therefore, Kucinich’s
policy works to allocate resources and pro-
tection to marginalized communities, but
that is where, if implemented, his trans-
formation of the social structure ends.
Finally, in terms of the procedural
paradigm of social justice, the Kucinich
campaign has much to amend in the cur-
rent administration’s processes established
for communication, particularly in terms
CS&P Lucas Salazar
of international relations. Here follows a
table that identified the points associated
with procedural justice:
Table 4. Procedural Table
Point Action
[3] With- Among the first actions of a
drawal Kucinich administration will be
from withdrawal from NAFTA and
NAFTA the WTO-to be replaced by fair
and WTO trade agreements.
[4] Repeal The government must not be
of the “Pa- allowed, without probable
triot Act” cause or warrant, to snoop on
our communications, medical
records, library records, and
student records.
[8] A Re- The doctrine of “pre-emption”
newed will be retired, as will an ag-
Commit- gressive, unilateralist foreign
ment to policy that makes our homeland
Peace and less secure, not more.
Diplomacy Our security forces will be en-
hanced by working with other
nations and the U.N. instead of
acting like an empire, arro-
gantly undermining interna-
tional agreements such as the
Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty,
the Biological and Chemical
Weapons Conventions, the
Small Arms Treaty, the Interna-
tional Criminal Court, and the
Kyoto Climate Treaty.
As President, Kucinich will
work to implement two meas-
ures he sponsored in Congress:
the Space Preservation Treaty,
which bans space-based weap-
ons, and a cabinet-level De-
partment of Peace, to establish
non-violence as an organizing
principle in both domestic and
international affairs.
[10] Envi- Globally, the U.S. will become
ronmental a leader in sustainable energy
CS&P Vol 3 Num 2
118
Renewal production and a partner with
and Clean developing nations in providing
Energy inexpensive, local, renewable
energy technologies.
Analyzing the above table leads to the
clear observation that Kucinich is con-
cerned with global decision-making for
global decisions. His criticism of the cur-
rent administration’s unilateralism is an
indicator that exclusive, biased decision-
making is something that Kucinich would
like to stray from. It is apparent that
Kucinich would like to see decisions made
in ways that include all voices (e.g., work-
ing with U.N., rather than acting as an
empire, to establish processes that every-
one can agree to).
One clear point of procedural jus-
tice mentioned in the informational pam-
phlet is that of due process. In the United
States Constitution it states the following
in the Sixth Amendment:
In all criminal prosecution, the accused shall
enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial,
by an impartial jury of the state and the dis-
trict wherein the crime shall have been
committed…and be informed of the nature
and cause of the accusation…and to have
assistance of counsel for his defense (US
Constitution).
The Patriot Act, what the pamphlet identi-
fies as legislation that “invites tyranny”, is
a clear point of the antithesis of procedural
justice. When points of the sixth amend-
ment are undermined by the new act, as
was clear in the case of Yaser Esam
Hamdi (Primary Document 3), it is clear
that a pluralism of voices was not included
in the decision-making of the “criminal”
and the “authority”. Mr. Hamdi was an
U.S. citizen who was raised in Saudi Ara-
bia and is now being held indefinitely as
an “enemy combatant” in the U.S. How
May 2005
119 Social Justice Theory
can justice be achieved, when one is not
offered a chance for defense to allegation?
The Kucinich campaign provides a
prime example of a movement for social
justice that utilizes the different methods
from the three paradigms for achieving a
just society described above. In short,
Kucinich would like to see a world where
everyone has access to quality health care
and education, enjoys civil rights, and has
access to the decision-making mechanisms
of society. Additionally, Kucinich takes a
step beyond the national; envisaging the
United States as an international collabo-
rator that can, “…return to its role as the
most admired-not hated-nation.”
Conclusion
This paper has explored the foundations,
described the current paradigms, and ap-
plied a theory of social justice. First, the
field of psychology was explored in order
to point out the areas of contention in the
field of psychology regarding the nature of
humankind. Here, the concepts of human
aggression, compulsion to self-actualize,
environmental control (as in behaviorism),
and unique ability of humans to live his-
torically identified the “stuff” of social
justice. To add to this discussion on foun-
dations, a short exploration of the philoso-
phical and political differences in the his-
torical and contemporary practice of the
social sciences was presented. Critical
realism was identified as a responsible ap-
proach to knowing. Postmodernism and
positivism were identified as dangerous
approaches in that they suffered from a
lack of humility. Also, three specific
paradigms of social justice theory were
discussed: redistribution, recognition, and
procedural. Contemporary and classical
theories were used to discuss the different
aspects of a theoretically just society that
the three paradigms focus on. This triple
paradigm model was then treated as an
Culture Society & Praxis
CS&P
analytical framework for a contemporary
movement for social justice.
References
Du Bois, W. E. B. (1920). The Souls of
White Folk. In Darkwater: Voices from
within the Veil. (pp 17-29). Mineola,
New York: Dover Publications Inc.
Du Bois, W. E. B. (1996). Of Our Spiri-
tual Strivings. In The Souls of Black
Folk.. New York: Modern Library.
Fraser, N. (1997). From redistribution to
recognition? Dilemmas of justice in a
“postsocialist” age. In Justice interrup-
tus: Critical reflections on the “postso-
cialist” condition (pp. 11-39). New
York: Routledge Press.
Freire, Paulo. (1970). Pedagogy of the
Oppressed. New York, New York: Con-
tinuum.
Freud, Sigmund. (1961). The Future of an
Illusion. W.W. Norton & Company:
New York, NY.
Goffman, Erving (1963). Stigma: Notes on
the Management of Spoiled Identity.
New York: Simon & Shuster, Inc.
Gould, Stephen J. (1981). The Mismeasure
of Man. W. W. Norton & Company:
New York, NY.
Lakoff, George (2004). Don’t Think of an
Elephant: Know Your Values and Frame
the Debate. White River Junction, Ver-
mont: Chelsea Green Publishing.
Marx, Karl in Kemenka, Eugene (ed).
(1983). The Portable Karl Marx. New
York, NY: Penguin Books USA Inc.
Mitchell, T. (2004). Social justice theory.
In Service-learning and social justice:
Making connections, making commit-
ments (pp. 54-76). Unpublished disserta-
tion. Amherst, MA: University of Mas-
sachusetts.
Rawls, John. (1971). A Theory of Justice.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
CS&P Lucas Salazar
Rogers, Carl R. (1969). Freedom To
Learn. Charles E. Columbus, OH:
Merrill Publishing Co.
Rosenau, Pauline (1992). Post-Modernism
in the Social Sciences. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
Scott, James C., (1992). Domination, Act-
ing and Fantasy. The Paths to Domina-
tion, Resistance, and Terror. (pp. 55-
84). Berkeley: University of California
Press.
Skinner, B.F. (1948). Walden Two. New
York, NY: Macmillian Company.
Trochim, William. (2001). The Research
Methods Knowledge Base, 2nd Ed. Cin-
cinnati, OH.: United States Constitution
Atomic Dog Publishing
Vygotsky, Lev S. (1978). Mind in Society:
The Development of Higher Psychologi-
cal Processes. Cambridge, Massachu-
setts: Harvard University Press.
Wells-Barnett, Ida B. (1899). Lynch Law
in Georgia. Atlanta Journal.
Wilbur, Ken. (2000). A Theory of Every-
thing: An Integral Approach for Busi-
ness, Politics, Science, and Spirituality.
Boston: Shambala.
Young, Iris M. (1997). Asymmetrical Re-
ciprocity: On Moral Respect, Wonder,
and Enlarged Thought. In Intersecting
CS&P Vol 3 Num 2
120
Voices: Dilemmas of Gender, Political
Philosophy, and Policy. (pp. 38-59).
Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Young, Iris M. (1990). Five Faces of Op-
pression. In Justice and the Politics of
Difference (pp. 39-65). Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
Zinn, Howard. (1999). A People’s History
of the United States: 1492 – Present.
New York, NY: Harper Collins Publish-
ers.
Primary Documents:
1. James Lake, MD explanation of ser-
vices informational sheet. “Announcing
a new private practice specializing in
evidence-based conventional and alter-
native treatments of adult psychiatric
disorders.”
2. Dennis Kucinich campaign flyer. “Den-
nis Kucinich for President 2004: The
Progressive Vision”
3. Article regarding Yaser Esam Hamdi in
the New York Times. On-line at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/09/nat
ional/09CND-
SCOT.html?ex=1079931600&en=07d4d
4fa98dd5d8a&ei=5070
May 2005