World days are mostly high in aspiration; they also serve as moments to review the state of the world. This is certainly true of the two observances currently framing our time—Social Justice Day last week and Zero Discrimination Day next week. This year, however, neither appears to be widely observed.
The scorecard for social justice is invariably depressing, yet on this Social Justice Day the picture is especially dire. Consider, for example, the cynical dealings concerning the future of Gaza and Ukraine, the expulsion of migrants and refugees, the conduct of wars, the treatment of children, and the breakdown of law-based international relationships. Likewise, the path toward zero discrimination is disheartening. The attack on the ideals of inclusion, diversity, and equity — coupled with the call to treat everybody the same, even when “the same” means that minority groups continue to suffer exclusion — is ominous. In such a climate, it is important to reflect on why social justice matters and why zero discrimination remains a necessary, albeit challenging, goal.
The central pillar of social justice is the acknowledgement that every human being possesses unique dignity and value, irrespective of race, religion, colour, gender, and virtue or lack of it. In all our interactions, we are entitled to respect and owe it to others. In business, employees must not be treated merely as costs; in war, civilians and prisoners must not be regarded as objects. Children within the justice system should not be treated as adults—they are individuals like us and deserve respect for their unique humanity.
This insight underpins the rule of law both within and between nations. It is evident in the anguished plea of torture victims — “Why are you doing this to me?” — and in the protest of children at inequitable treatment within the family — “It’s not fair.” While its implications for various situations may be debated, the principle itself remains axiomatic. It precludes discrimination based on race, religion, wealth, and political views, and forbids arbitrary incarceration and other forms of punishment that disregard individuals’ varying levels of responsibility. This principle is enshrined in the rule of law.
An associated pillar of social justice is the recognition that we do not flourish as isolated, competitive individuals but through cooperative relationships. We rely on one another and bear responsibility for each other. Governments, in particular, must care for all citizens — especially the most vulnerable — and foster the contribution of communities to society’s overall flourishing. They must serve the common good.
Together, these insights imply that both individuals and groups are entitled to support from society and have a duty to aid the flourishing of others, particularly the disadvantaged. The prosperity of individuals and communities is interdependent. This duty is reflected in taxes and levies proportionate to wealth. A society characterised by gross inequality between the wealthy and the poor cannot be deemed just. The measure of justice lies in how society supports the neediest as an expression of the common good.
Respect for individuals and our shared humanity also shapes relationships among social groups and between nations. Society flourishes when people have strong bonds and agency within communities and institutions—such as schools, ethnic and religious associations, and recreational clubs. Conflicts, whether between employers and employees over wages and conditions or between nations over territorial control, must be resolved through mutual respect, diplomacy, and national or international arbitration. The temptation to resolve disputes through the unilateral exercise of superior power must be resisted by both national and international bodies, as well as by public opinion.
'The central pillar of social justice is the acknowledgement that every human being possesses unique dignity and value, irrespective of race, religion, colour, gender, and virtue or lack of it.'
These principles provide criteria for evaluating our society and its policies. They stand in opposition to a crude, self-centred view of society tacitly accepted today — a view that portrays society as a collection of competitive individuals pursuing self-fulfilment defined by increases in wealth, esteem, and power. For adherents of this perspective, societal health is measured by the freedom given to individuals to amass wealth and power, with competition serving as the engine for building collective strength and prosperity. Such a society is one of winners and losers, characterised by discrimination rather than diversity. It is a society and a world held together not by cooperation and regulation, but by control, with monuments in the form of casinos, mansions, and prisons.
Such societies may endure for generations, but ultimately they fail because they are inhuman. Those who win the competition and reshape society to serve their own interests become ruthless, destroying one another and fouling even their own nests. In contrast, we honour and remember the often unrecognised individuals whose moral compasses pointed towards the true north of social justice and who worked tirelessly for its restoration in society.
Andrew Hamilton is consulting editor of Eureka Street, and writer at Jesuit Social Services.
Main image: (Getty Images)