1980s liberation theology. I found the political language and perspective interesting.
Here, justice is thought of in terms of economic distribution and the "___ism" you have identified as the point of struggle. ("__isms", meaning things like racism, sexism, etc.)
I was fascinated by the Rainbow Cooperative case study. It illustrated Michael Gerber's "The E-Myth" on a grand scale. According to Gerber, the technician thinks he can run the business, but fails to realize that working-in-the-business and working-on-the-business involve two entirely different skill sets. This lack of understanding leads to the failure of the business.
This was the reason the Rainbow Cooperative failed, but liberation theology sees the reason as the long history of injustice. In other words, the people never had a chance to succeed and it wasn't their fault.
Gerber doesn't blame business failure on abstract "__isms." He places responsibility squarely upon the shoulders of the entrepreneur who began the enterprise with flawed assumptions.
Also, the Rainbow Cooperative leadership could never resolve the reality (as illustrated in "Animal Farm") that no matter which way they tried to equally distribute the work and money, some people always ended up becoming "more equal than others."
But other examples in this book are complex and on a much grander scale, such as the legalized racism at the time in South Africa. I think the case of the Rainbow Cooperative illustrates that, even on a national scale, merely re-distributing "things" will not fundamentally change the human dynamic. (But neither will Thought Reform, which also has been tried and found wanting.)
I strongly agree with Lebacqz that justice is lived in treating others with respect and dignity, and speaking out when you sense injustice. I appreciate that she admits the difficulties involved. "Whether we do in fact recognize an injustice immediately is perhaps questionable," Lebacqz writes on page 11. "Surely there would not be so many arguments about what constitutes justice if the nature of injustice were so immediately recognizable."
In the end, Lebacqz admits the impossibility of nailing down a "theory of justice."
How right she is -- human relationships are complicated, and our best effort is always limited.