Free and Equal: A Manifesto for a Just Society

To use the “pie” analogy much loved by economists, the difference principle calls on us not to maximize the overall size of the economic pie, nor to rigidly insist that everyone should have a perfectly equal slice—but to make the size of the slice that goes to the least well off as big as possible.

The difference principle is concerned with the structural inequalities that affect the life prospects of different social groups—those that result from the way we organize our social and economic institutions—rather than inequalities that inevitably arise as people make choices and go about their lives.[58] It requires no more interference than any

Rawls explicitly stated that “welfare state capitalism” could never fully achieve his principles of justice.[71] Rather, we need to reimagine our economic model in a more fundamental way—embracing a more universal approach to meeting basic needs, developing a comprehensive agenda to increase earnings and share society’s wealth, and putting meaningf

Our responsibility as a society to guarantee the availability of meaningful work is grounded in a pragmatic recognition that some kind of work is more or less necessary for most of us, and that since this typically takes up so much of our time it is bound to shape our lives in profound ways. In practical terms, as we shall see, we can ensure these

If equality of opportunity is about having an equal start, then the difference principle is about making sure that the prizes are fair.

But whether people feel a sense of self-respect is also influenced by objective features of our social and economic institutions, including the availability and nature of paid work.

we should follow a different decision-making strategy, known as “the maximin rule.” To be precise, rather than choosing the option that is best on average (maximizing expected utility), we should compare the worst outcome under each option, and then choose the option where the worst outcome is as good as possible

For Rawls, a just society is one in which we can “face one another openly,” in the sense that we can offer a justification to one another for the way society is organized, including to the least well off.

The malaise sweeping across today’s liberal democracies is about more than money—it reflects a more profound crisis of dignity and meaning which is closely tied to changes in the nature of work over recent decades, from the decline in industrial jobs and communities to the rise of automation and the gig economy.