1. Equality and Inequality: Perspectives from Political Theory
Paul Billingham
St Anne’s College and Department of Politics & International Relations, Oxford
DCM Social Sciences stream, March 21st 2015

2. The Egalitarian Plateau
All political philosophers agree that humans are morally equal – all enjoy an equal basic moral status
Question is the implications of this basic equality
For the way political decisions are made
For the way social positions are achieved
For the way resources are distributed

3. Equality Before the Law
The law should treat all citizens as equals
Don’t have different laws for rich and poor etc.
Implications for ‘access to justice’
Legal aid
Limits on private financing of lawsuits?
Strict equality of expenditure on legal processes?

4. Political Equality Basic equality often used to justify democracy
All should have right to vote, hold office, form political parties, etc.
‘Deliberative democracy’ has social preconditions
Adequate information
Adequate education
Lack of poverty

5. Political Equality Basic equality often used to justify democracy
All should have right to vote, hold office, form political parties, etc.
‘Deliberative democracy’ has social preconditions
Economic inequality can lead to unequal political influence
Application to campaign finance:
Limit or ban private funding for political parties

6. Distributive Equality
Neither distributive inequality nor distributive equality are ‘natural’
Both are the result of economic and social structures
Ideals of equality require justifications
But so do ideals that permit inequality

7. Equality of Opportunity
Individuals should compete on fair terms for social positions
‘Formal’ equality of opportunity – people’s chances shouldn’t be determined by gender, race, religion, etc.
Ensures relevant competencies determine who gets jobs
But doesn’t say anything people’s relative chances of acquiring those competencies

8. Equality of Opportunity
‘Conventional’ equality of opportunity – people’s chances shouldn’t be determined by social circumstances, family background etc.
Prospects should depend on ability and effort
Can justify opposition to private education and policy of universal loans for university education

9. Equality of Opportunity
‘Conventional’ equality of opportunity – people’s chances shouldn’t be determined by social circumstances, family background etc.
Why endorse this ideal?
Stops people’s chances in life being determined by factors outside their control
People’s fate should be determined by their choices, not their circumstances

10. Equality of Opportunity
This argument for conventional equality of opportunity extends to natural talent
Leads to ‘radical’ equality of opportunity
Doesn’t mean that jobs shouldn’t go to the most qualified and competent
But affects the rewards attached to such jobs

11. Choice-Sensitive Egalitarianism
Two principles:
Inequalities due to luck are unfair
Inequalities due to choices can be fair
Income and leisure case – no real inequality here
Cake case – inequality of outcome but equality of opportunity
Treating people as equals means not letting them be worse off due to luck and holding them properly responsible for their choices

12. Choice-Sensitive Egalitarianism
Policy implications?
Actually quite hard to say
Certainly more redistribution than we currently see
High levels of inheritance tax
‘Conventional’ equality of opportunity also leads to this
A lot depends on the broader economic system CSE is embedded within

13. Objections to CSE Dispute importance of choice/luck distinction
Impossible to draw a sharp line
Not so morally significant anyway
Misses the real heart of egalitarianism – ‘social equality’, equal standing as citizens, opposing domination and oppression
Distributive implications follow from this, rather than being the starting point
Too focused on individual shares

14. Rawls’s Theory of Justice
Justice concerns the distribution of benefits and burdens within a scheme of social cooperation among equal persons
‘Original position’ thought experiment
Principles chosen by parties who do not know their place within society
Basic intuition is an ideal of impartiality

15. Rawls’s Two (/Three) Principles
Each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive total system of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar system of liberty for all
Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both:
attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity
to the greatest expected benefit of the least advantaged (the ‘difference principle’)

16. Policy Implications? More egalitarian welfare state capitalism?
Maximising expectations of worst off group = maximising prospects of those who work in lowest skilled, least productive jobs
Wage subsidy
Guaranteed minimum income

17. Policy Implications? Fair value of the political liberties
Preventing economic inequalities that lead to political inequalities
Fair equality of opportunity + difference principle + fair value of political liberties = ‘property-owning democracy’
Dispersing ownership of wealth and capital – ‘predistribution’

18. Property-Owning Democracy
POD policies:
High levels of taxation on inheritance and bequest
Measures to block the influence of wealth on politics (public funding; limits to private donations)
Guaranteed minimum income / wage subsidy
Government support for home-buyers
Everyone being provided with savings
Universal access to high-quality education

19. Final Reflections on Rawls
Combines insights from proponents of both social equality and distributive equality
Doesn’t endorse choice-sensitive egalitarianism

20. Is Sufficiency Enough?
What really matters is that everyone has enough, not how much people have compared to others
Sufficientarianism contains two claims:
Positive Thesis – It’s extremely morally urgent that everyone is brought above a sufficiency threshold
Negative Thesis – It’s morally unimportant what the distribution of resources is above the threshold

21. Is Sufficiency Enough?
The value of some goods depends on how much I have compared to you – education, money
How do we define the threshold?
Positive Thesis demands a fairly low threshold
Negative Thesis demands a fairly high threshold
Can any threshold make both claims plausible?

22. Why Accept Basic Equality?
Presupposition of the moral point of view?
Interest-based view
What about animals?
Why do all interests count equally?

23. Why Accept Basic Equality?
Presupposition of the moral point of view?
Interest-based view
Capacity-based view
Underinclusive
Why doesn’t this lead to a scalar view?
‘Range property’ response

24. Why Accept Basic Equality?
Presupposition of the moral point of view?
Interest-based view
Capacity-based view
‘High rank’ view
Christian view – image of God, loved by God

25. Summary Equality before the law Political equality
Equality of opportunity – ‘formal’, ‘conventional’
Choice-sensitive egalitarianism
‘Social equality’ critique
Rawls: difference principle, property-owning democracy
Sufficientarianism
Why accept basic equality?

26. Equality and Inequality: Perspectives from Political Theory
Paul Billingham
St Anne’s College and Department of Politics & International Relations, Oxford
DCM Social Sciences stream, March 21st 2015