Justice and Social Equity

Social Equity

Justice and Social Equity

Income inequality is growing at a precipitous rate in America. The cry for justice for the 99% reflects the notion that America is increasingly being dominated by wealthy elites, and the wealthy can use their greater economic, political and social capital to sustain their advantage at the helm of American society. This is manifested in a variety of ways, including the high burden of debt carried by young people who try to better themselves by going to college and then are faced with the prospect of being beholden to that debt for most their productive working lives -- provided that they can find a job upon graduating. Fear of debt may drive the children of the middle and lower classes to cheaper colleges, thus creating even more of a concentration of wealth and power, given the social connections that can be fostered at elite institutions. "Throughout American history when individual achievement competed directly with equality, achievement almost always won. The American ethos of achievement and of individual merit has reshaped the ethos of equality" (Frederickson 2005: 3). However, there is a growing sense that even the ability to 'achieve' is becoming limited for members of the 99%. Pitting achievement against equality suggests that everyone has the same ability to demonstrate their merit, but the longer inequity persists, the more difficult it becomes for even the most talented individual to shine.

By definition, justice' suggests that everyone 'gets what he or she deserves' while 'social equity' suggests that everyone gets roughly 'the same.' These two concepts are not interchangeable, and, indeed, can contradict one another. The starkest example of the difficulty of merging the concepts of justice and equity is manifest in the practice of some forms of affirmative action. For example, in Texas, the top 10% of every high school are guaranteed admission into the state university system, which may mean that lower-income students from poorly-performing schools may gain entrance while students from top schools may not. However, while this may feel unjust to those who are denied entrance on one hand, proponents of the policy suggest that it creates a more socially equitable society and reflects the fact that many students in underprivileged schools lack the advantages of students in more affluent school districts (Frederickson 2005: 3). Justice tends to be framed on an individual basis; social equity (by definition) explores what it means for a society to allocate resources fairly amongst many individuals and groups. Affirmative action promotes social equity for historically discriminated-against groups even while, strictly speaking, on a case-by-case basis it may not be fair.