Skip to content

11 Anderson Against Luck Egalitarianism

Introduction

  • Critiques recent egalitarian theories (e.g., "luck egalitarianism") for being susceptible to conservative criticisms.
  • Highlights embarrassing outcomes, such as compensating individuals for laziness or trivial misfortunes, which undermine the political goals of equality.
  • Posits that contemporary egalitarian theories focus excessively on correcting cosmic luck rather than addressing social oppression.

Core Argument

  1. Critique of Luck Egalitarianism:
  2. Luck egalitarianism focuses on compensating people for bad luck (e.g., poor genetic endowments, illnesses, accidents).
  3. It divides misfortunes into "brute luck" (beyond control) and "option luck" (resulting from choices).

  4. Fails to account for social oppression and structural inequalities like race, gender, and class.

  5. Problems with Luck Egalitarianism:

  6. Victims of Bad Option Luck:
    • Neglects those who suffer due to personal choices (e.g., uninsured drivers or those living in disaster-prone areas).
    • Discriminates between congenital disabilities and those acquired through personal decisions.
  7. Humiliating Aid:
    • The state's aid under this model is paternalistic and stigmatizes recipients by labeling them as inferior or less capable.

  8. Envy and Pity Dynamics:

    • Grounds distribution on the pity of the "fortunate" and the envy of the "less fortunate," undermining dignity and equality.

  9. Philosophical Issues:

  10. Treats human diversity hierarchically, moralistically judging the "responsible" and "irresponsible."
  11. Offers limited support to vulnerable groups like dependent caretakers, exacerbating inequality.

Alternative Proposal: Democratic Equality

  1. Core Tenets:
  2. Aims to eliminate oppression, not simply mitigate natural misfortunes.
  3. Fosters a community where individuals relate as equals, integrating social respect with distributive justice.

  4. Focuses on guaranteeing universal access to the social conditions of freedom, such as education, health, and participation in democratic institutions.

  5. Features of Democratic Equality:

  6. Avoids humiliating paternalism by emphasizing collective obligations of citizens.
  7. Aligns distributive principles with the expressive demands of equal respect.
  8. Addresses structural inequalities while empowering individuals to take responsibility within reasonable constraints.

Critique of Luck Egalitarianism's Institutional Framework

  1. Market Reliance:
  2. Delegates too much to free markets, which exacerbate inequalities and exploitation.

  3. Fails to provide a safety net for the victims of bad option luck, leaving them vulnerable to severe hardships.

  4. Welfare State Limitations:

  5. Restricts aid to only those who are blamelessly disadvantaged, fostering a humiliating dependence on moralistic judgments.

Conclusion

  • Anderson proposes a shift from "luck egalitarianism" to "democratic equality," which centers on combating oppression and fostering egalitarian social relationships.
  • Argues for policies that respect citizens' dignity while addressing systemic inequalities rather than just compensating for bad luck.