Responsibility for Justice

by Iris Marion Young, Martha C. Nussbaum (Contributor)

When the noted political philosopher Iris Marion Young died in 2006, her death was mourned as the passing of "one of the most important political philosophers of the past quarter-century" (Cass Sunstein) and as an important and innovative thinker working at the conjunction of a number of important global justice; democracy and difference; continental political theory; ethics and international affairs; and gender, race and public policy.

In her long-awaited Responsibility for Justice , Young discusses our responsibilities to address "structural" injustices in which we among many are implicated (but for which we not to blame), often by virtue of participating in a market, such as buying goods produced in sweatshops, or participating in booming housing markets that leave many homeless. Young argues that addressing these structural injustices requires a new model of responsibility, which she calls the "social connection" model. She develops this idea by clarifying the nature of structural injustice; developing the notion of political responsibility for injustice and how it differs from older ideas of blame and guilt; and finally how we can then use this model to describe our responsibilities to others no matter who we are and where we live.

With a foreward by Martha C. Nussbaum, this last statement by a revered and highly influential thinker will be of great interest to political theorists and philosophers, ethicists, and feminist and political philosophers.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Politics, Theory, Feminism, Social Justice, Academic

224 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2006

About the author

Iris Marion Young was an American political theorist and feminist focused on the nature of justice and social difference. She served as Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago and was affiliated with the Center for Gender Studies and the Human Rights program there.

Reviews

[Rein · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a book of fundamental significance for any debate about social and political justice. Young has carefully separated the concepts of guilt/blame and responsibility and shows how structural injustice emerges from the actions of a multitude of separate individuals, all acting within their rights, in good faith, and pursuing their legitimate interests. As a result, she has uncovered the mechanisms at work in the reproduction of social phenomena that are often deplored also by those who, unwittingly, participate in the chains of actions that make such injustice possible, and also provided us with a basis from which to challenge it. Lucid, well-argumented and offering highly relevant critique of many scholars who have previously addressed these issues, both classics (Rawls and Arendt among them) and contemporary authors, this book is essential reading not just for anyone interested in social science, but for everyone who wishes to clear up their own ideas about the society and their own role in it. Of course, there are a few minor points in which I disagree with Young, but they won't make sense to anyone who hasn't read the book, so I am not going to elaborate on them.

[Jef Gerets · Rating 3 out of 5]

Een duidelijke analyse van structurele onrechtvaardigheid. Young geeft aan dat er structurele onrechtvaardigheden zijn, niet per se hoe ze tot stand komen. Uiteindelijk maakt dat ook niet echt uit in haar analyse aangezien de onrechtvaardigheden er gewoonweg zijn en moeten opgelost worden. Young schuift een nieuw model om over verantwoordelijkheid te spreken naar voren. Een soort van collectieve verantwoordelijkheid gebaseerd op collectieve actie zonder een schuldige vinger te wijzen naar iemand. Haar sociaal connectie model zegt dat iedereen die geconnecteerd is met de sociaal-structurele processen een verantwoordelijkheid draagt om die processen aan te passen. Dit dus door collectieve actie. Echter een praktische invulling mist nog. Dit is eerder een beschrijvend analyse kader dat dan op verschillende casussen kan worden toegepast. Ik denk dat het bijvoorbeeld een goed analyse model is om over de verantwoordelijkheid van klimaatopwarming na te denken. Al bij al een interessant werk dat echter toch wat op zijn honger laat zitten.

[Vignir Másson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Þessi er geggjuð. Mjög skýr og aðgengileg. Sum stef eru endurtekin nokkuð oft en það er án efa afleiðing þess að verkið var ekki fullklárað áður en Young lést. Þrátt fyrir það er þetta frábær bók sem inniheldur áhrifamikla kenningu um ábyrgð og umfjöllun Young um óréttlæti hefur svo mikið að leggja til þeirrar umræðu sem hefur verið ríkjandi síðan George Floyd myrtur.

4.5 stjarna

[Chris · Rating 4 out of 5]

Contemporary theories of justice typically focus on the problem of distribution and what John Rawls calls the "core institutions" of a well-ordered, democratic society. Young's book argues for expanding justice beyond basic social institutions to the "structure" of society. In doing so, she addresses the difficult question of collective responsibility for unjust social circumstances. Through a critical reading of Hannah Arendt's views on collective responsibility, Young engages and criticizes the limitations of more traditional moral and legal conceptions of responsibility and guilt to develop what she calls the "social connection model of responsibility." According to this view, agents whose conduct contributes (even if unintentionally) to social processes that have unjust outcomes share some responsibility for addressing social injustice. In the later chapters of the book, Young draws on this model of responsibility for justice to address globalization and historical justices. The book will be of interest to those concerned with understanding the problems of social and economic justice as well as scholars and students of political theory and philosophy.

[John Lussier · Rating 5 out of 5]

A work of political philosophy advocating for a view of justice framed by global responsibility. Young shows how an account of justice framed by personal guilt or liability is inadequate when we start to discuss the reality of structures and institutions. Instead, Young puts forward that we must begin to consider justice through the lens of future-oriented responsibility with an emphasis on our actions having ramifications that contradict our own values. This connection-al model of justice is capable of ascribing guilt and liability to individual actors that cause harm through their actions, but is also capable of showing how a society can, while individually guiltless, become unjust in its structures and institutions. Young shows how we are responsible globally but especially locally for creating a more just society, and increasing our awareness of injustice. While we cannot be called guilty of past injustices in this model, we are responsible for repairing the hurt of past injustices.

[Amy · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really appreciate Young's distinction between guilt and responsibility and, similarly, between a liability model of responsibility for injustice and a social connection model. In discussions about injustice, it is easy to get caught up in whether I, as an individual, am at fault for the ills of the world. Young describes this perspective as unproductive. Rather than trying to place blame for great social injustices that transcend individuals, we can realize that we have a social connection to the rest of the world. We might not be guilty of specific infractions against other people, but we do have a collective responsibility to work to rectify problems and work for justice.

[Meaghan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Structuralist approach to explaining and countering social inequality. Liability model (backward-looking, concerned with assigning blame and damages) vs. social connections model (forward-looking, demands we engage in collective action to remake the world). We are all responsible for structural injustice because we all act in socially acceptable ways (i.e., wanting your children to go to a "good school," etc.) that ultimately contribute to structural injustices, such as homelessness, residential segregation, and educational disparities. Four strategies social actors use to avoid responsibility: reification (structural injustice is inevitable), denying connection to others (I am not related to the suffering of distant people), immediacy demands (structural injustice exists but I have more pressing tasks to respond to), and "it's not my problem" (structural injustice exists but it's not my responsibility to fix it, (usually) it's the government's). We are responsible for structural injustice that manifests globally because we are connected to people around the globe via our actions (e.g., buying fast fashion). Four parameters that should guide your actions: power (individuals should focus their efforts in the areas in which they have the most influence), privilege (individuals with more privilege have a greater responsibility to take action), interest (individuals who are most harmed ought to take responsibility for ameliorating structural injustice), and collective ability (individuals need to come together and coordinate their actions). Basically, individuals have different actions and degrees of action they should take, and these differences stem from their varied social positions. Five features of the social connections model: not isolating perpetrators (we all contribute to structural injustice, so isolating people is often nonsensical and futile), judging background condition (recognize that normal and socially sanctioned activities contribute to structural injustice), more forward-looking than backward-looking (looking back is important to gauge historical context, but most attention should be placed forward to ascertain the current and probable means through which structural injustice is advanced), shared responsibility (we all have a shared responsibility to cultivate a more just world), and collective action (we can only take up a shared responsibility when we act collectively). Four structural processes: objective social facts (material constraints and institutional/social rules that constrain or enable individual action), positions (social positions are interconnected, set "the expectations and possibilities of interaction," and "position people prior to their interactions"), actions (people act in often unconscious ways according to the rules and resources that structure their lives; people understand the rules to apply differently to different populations), and unintended consequences (the outcomes of the uncoordinated actions of masses of people who are enacting their own lives - produces counter-finality, occurs when people act in ways that make their lives worse). Four relationships agents have to structural processes: those guilty of committing harm (those who act voluntarily and with adequate knowledge), those who are not guilty but are responsible because they participated in the conditions that allowed others to commit harm and at least passively supported them (those who see injustice but don't say anything about it or deceive themselves into thinking nothing bad is happening), those who distance themselves from those committing harm and/or attempt to prevent harm, and those who publicly oppose or resist the commission of harm (this group are the ones taking up political responsibility because they act in public ways that aim to incite collective action).

[Fernando · Rating 5 out of 5]

I think this article is a must read for anyone interested in Justice theory, and particularly who wants to understand the complexities of modern day problems such as child labour in underdeveloped countries, without adressing the topic superficially.

Brilliant analysis of how complex trade operations and international legal barriers can generate negative externalities that cannot be blamed on any individual actor. The author dives into the complexities of modern production systems and effectively analyses the different actor’s responsibility in world problems.

Young also makes a proposal as to how we could organise differently. Very well thought, and explained.

[Brooke Bowlin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Y’all are lucky I don’t have time to read more political philosophy right now cause I’d be insufferable. This slapped.

“Those who are beneficiaries of racialized structures with unjust outcomes, however, can properly be called to a special moral and political responsibility to recognize our privilege, to acknowledge its continuities with historical injustice, and to act on an obligation to work on transforming the institutions that offer this privilege, even if this means worsening one's own conditions and opportunities compared to what they would have been.”

[Rus Funk · Rating 5 out of 5]

Outstanding exploration of what it means to be responsible and take responsibility for promoting justice. She offers the notion of a “social connect” model and locates responsibilities for justice in our connection with each other (differing this from the liability foundation for responsibility) arguing that our levels of responsibilities vary depending upon our levels of privilege
Highly recommended!

[Colin Jones · Rating 5 out of 5]

This took me the better part of a year and a half to finish, not because it’s long or overly dense but because I wanted to give it the attention and focus it deserved. Young’s writing, even in this unfinished form, is thoughtful and thought-provoking and resonates with so many of the questions we’re grappling with decades later in the COVID era about the balance between individual and collective responsibility.

[Reichnekov · Rating 5 out of 5]

Banger, and a must-read. It provides an excellent argument while neatly stepping over the toes of everyone involved. Her ethos seems to be "why waste time blaming when we could spend time fixing?"

[jadey · Rating 5 out of 5]

What is there to say

[Bella-Grace · Rating 5 out of 5]

everyone should read this

[Kirk · Rating 5 out of 5]

As Abraham Joshua Heschel said in many contexts, "some are guilty, all are responsible." With no sign that she ever heard of such an aphorism, Iris Marion Young brilliantly develops it into a detailed moral theory and applies it to housing issues.

Five stars for Young's book, one star for Nussbaum's wretched foreword. Her personal tribute to Young is fine, but if she couldn't stifle the urge to attack the late author's basic thesis in favor of generalized guilt baiting, she should have put it in an afterword.