Filetype PDF | Posted on 16 Jan 2023 | 2 years ago
Authentication
digital resources
147x Filetype PDF File size 0.20 MB Source: www.cssscal.org
NOTES
Flawed Idea of Justice try to point out some ontological, episte
mological and methodological limits in
Sen’s idea of ustice. As Sen himself says,
quoting ernard illiams, “disagreement
Maidul Islam does not necessarily hae to e oercome”
p 1. efore one starts theorising a out
The questions of antagonism, istinguished professor and o el remoing inustice as Sen has done, it
hegemony and imperialism are aureate Amartya Sen, in his ould e orth asing first a out the
missing in Amartya Sen’s treatise recent oo, The Idea of Justice ontological and e
istential question of
The Idea of Justice. ne cannot has taen a pragmatic approach y inustice itself. That is to say, ho inus
pondering oer the idea of enhancement tices occur and e
ist in society ne can
comprehensiely understand the of ustice y remoal of inustice instead of argue that inustices are functions of specific
notions of ustice and inustice imagining an a priori perfect ust society, or poer relations in society, here the
ithout addressing these identifying “perfectly ust” social arrange unust conditions of ple s are the results
core issues. ments or ust institutions. Sen has also of certain policies of the poer loc.
emphasised pu lic reasoning and pu lic ence, antagonism is a constitutie part of
de ates for alternatie isions of remoing any society. e cannot therefore address
inustice. Thus, Sen’s idea of ustice is the question of ustice hile focusing on
pluralist in character ith a democratic remoing inustice ithout analy sing and
engagement ith aried positions and yet remoing antagonism prealent in soci
ith possi ilities to arrie at certain collec ety. The present crisis in the form of eco
tie outcomes. Sen’s oo holds merit as it nomic inequalities, unemployment, glo al
only sees to search for an idea of ustice capitalist e
ploitation of enironment and
rather than ansering “hat is ustice” the crisis of “glo al iolence” or glo al
and does not mae a grand claim that terrorism ould e unresoled if the
“this is ustice”. Sen’s approach is not to antagonistic poer relations across the
proide an “ideal, perfec t, ust society orld continue to e
ist.
theory” ut to loo at alternatie ays of egarding “pu lic reasoning”, one can
remoing inustices or ho inustices can as the folloing questions ho ould
e minimised in comparatie approaches decide the rules and regulations of pu lic
or “realisation focused comparison” as he de ates and pu lic reasoning in a orld
claims in e
ten ding the legacies of Adam controlled y the corporate media ho
Smith, eremy entham, ohn Stuart ill, ould in pu lic de ates in faour of
arqui s de ondorcet, ary ollstonecraft ustice and against inustice an there e
and arl ar
hile differing ith the such an ideal situation of democratic
“transcendental institutionalism” of con dialogue eteen utilitarian, egalitarian
tractarian theorists lie Thomas o es , and nononsense li ertarian as Sen has
ohn oce, ean acques ousseau, portrayed in his ideal scheme of things
mmanuel ant and ohn als. Accordin g r ould not the pragmatic reality e ery
to Sen, the contractualists elieed in an different – that of an “impossi le dia
ideal, per fect, ust society theory on the logue” precisely ecause the ery different
asis of trans cendentalism to find perfectly positions on ustice fundamentally dis
ideal, ust social arrange ment s hile the agree ith one another and has an in uilt
comparatie frame or theorists ere narcissism ithin each one of them, claim
interested in remoing inustices in aried ing “our path is the right path”, ased on
ays. The merits of Sen’s approach to their reason. Therefore, reasoning as a
The opinions e
pressed in this article are ustice lies in the fact that it tries to mae alue is neither autonomous nor impar
entirely personal, ut also resulting from a distinguishe d contri ution y differing tial, ut hether a hegemonic uniersal
numerous de ates and discussions. am also ith ant’s notion of “perfect ustice”, reason is dominant or ruling the society is
inde ted to the suggestions and insightful Aristotle’s “uniersal ustice” and als’ a significant question to pose. n this
comments of an anonymous referee. preo ccupation ith ustice and moral rights. respect, e can remind ar
Engels’
aidul slam moidul.islam@gmail.com is a The oo, in this riter’s opinion, ho famous proclamation in The German Ideo
doctoral student in epartment of Politics and eer, has seeral deficiencies. n this arti logy “the ideas of the ruling class are in
nternational elations, niersity of
ford. cle e ill critically engage ith Sen, and every epoch the ruling ideas”. n that case,
116 august 6, 2011 vol xlvi no 32 EPW Economic & Political Weekly
NOTES
“the idea of ustice” and “ays to remoe authoritarian imposition from a oe than after eentful political transformations
inustice” ecome a game of contesting hegemonic formation from elo ith such as the Spartacus slae reolt, English
positions struggling for hegemony. There people’s consent and actie participation eolution, £rench eolution, ussian
fore, setting the rules of such a game in championing a ersion of ustice can e eolution, hinese eolution, ranian
of contesting positions and the final out questioned¢collapsed ith ne possi ilities slamic eolution, national li eration
come of that game is dependent on in of struggle for li eration from a repressie and decolonisation. After the transforma
ning and losing parties of hegemonic notion of ustice. tion of the postar elfare state to the
struggle of contesting positions. ore n case of a repressie poer, the nor retreat of the elfare state ith the emer
oer, there cannot e any “neutral author matie idealism of “ust society” itself gence of neoli eral consensus, ustice has
ity” setting the rules of pu lic reason and ecomes relegated to redundancy ith the not een ensured to significant sections of
pu lic de ates ecause authority y defi emergence of realism, here only poer, population in those societies and indeed
nition is lined ith poer and the his and remaining seated in poer ecomes e find ne forms of inustices haunting
toric e
perience of human e
istence an ideal. Thus, ideals lie ustice or remo the orld. oeer, it can e definitely
shos us that poer is neer innocent or ing inustice only ecome an illusionary argued that some of the a oementioned
impartial ut has a motie to fulfil, and eil to camouflage the hidden goal of the political transformations hae made adance
thus open to manipulation y the domi political act of achieing poer. n such a ments in maing societies relatiely more
nant poer loc for its on ested inter situation, the promise and hope of esta ust, hile eliminating certain inustices
ests. n this respect, Sen does not engage lishing a ust society or remoing inus lie a olition of slaery, dis andment of
ith the concept of hegemony, hich tices is a political proect of the present. priate armies of propertied classes, con
actually deries from the anta gonistic The promise of ustice or remoing inus centrated focus on social sectors lie
nature of human society fractured ith tice is made to the people at the current health and education, etc. n the other
aried ethicopolitical position s and dis conuncture no for political mo ilisa hand, in the current neoli eral dispensa
tinct politicoideological articulations. tion to esta lish a “relatiely ne ust tion, e find ust concerns for eniron
society ” in the near future. o, regard ment and “right to information” y car
Question of Political Struggle ing the a sence of hegemony as a core ing out a space for goernmental account
t is indeed surprising that een if ramsci concept in Sen’s or, there are to more a ility and responsi ility to the pu lic, ut
is listed as a “political radical” p 11, Sen issues hich need to e addressed. £irst, at the same time, e can also itness ne
only places him ithin the categories of any normatie concept such as ustice, forms of inustices ith financial crisis
“entanglements, language and communica li erty, equality, freedom, etc, are histori and its negatie effects on employment
tion” and descri es him as an influence on cally specific and are therefore contingent and income, socialisation of corporate
am ridge economist Piero Sraffa, ho, on specific time and space. £or e
ample, losses y ailing out ig capital ith pu
in turn, influenced the great th century there as a point of time in human history lic money, offering “social ri es” Pat
philosopher, udig ittgenstein pp 11¡1 here the erdict of a clan leader or nai 6 in the name of corporate ta
and not as an original ar
ist thiner, emperor as seen as ustice from a legalistic concessions, land gra ing and e
propria
ho introduced the concept of hegemony point of ie. Similarly, ancient ree tion of the peasant economy coupled ith
1
as a ey tool to understand politics. e philosophers lie Plato and Aristotle did agrarian crisis in many deeloping coun
can further clarify that the struggle to not argue that the e
istence of slaes in tries, the retreat of elfarist policies, etc.
ensure ustice or remoing inustice to their societies is fundamentally unust. Since, Sen’s oo is ritten for our times,
arrie at relatiely more ust conditions Secondly, any normatie concept lie ustice, he does not offer us any solution ho e
ia Sen’s approach is intricately connected li erty, equality, freedom, etc, also has a can mae societies relatiely ust in the
to the question of political struggle to in class¢group underpinning. Thus, hich midst of neoli eral hegemony. ather his
hegemony oer the rest of the population. class¢group gets ustice at the e
pense of arguments can ell e sufficient to sus
The population in a societ y can e politi hom and furthermore, ho decides tain a neoli eral dispensation as e ill
cally coninced for a particular ersion of hat is ust and hat is unust, much ain see ne
t on the question of imperialism.
ustice or ays of remoing inustice y to the iet¤schean pro lem of ho decides
consultations, consent, democratic partici good and eil iet¤sche ¥, 1¡¡ is a Vehicles of US Imperialism
pations, etc. f a particular ersion of significant question to pose, hich Sen Sen argues that the nited ations, many
ustice is superimposed from top, then has not ased precisely ecause of his nongoernmental organisation’s NGO
hegemony nonetheless can e esta lished, complete de uning of the concept of and parts of the nes media hae a
ut ith coercie mechanisms, hich in a hegemony in his ritings. positie role to play in ensuring glo al
ay can also inite resistance¢challenge o, one might argue that Sen’s proect demo cracy characterised y glo al rea
to the hegemonic formation¢poer loc of remoing inustices instead of giing soning pp ¦¡. ne can raise an
and thus can limit its scope of operation. the call for a transcendental perfect ust empirico factual question as to ho the
n that circumstance, the ery notion of a society has merit ecause the history of UN, NGOs and media are going to facilitate
hegemonic idea of ustice and its moral human e
istence has so far shon that no glo al democracy hen more often than
authority that is esta lished through an society has een a solutely ust and een not, they are sold to corporate interests
Economic & Political Weekly EPW august 6, 2011 vol xlvi no 32 11
NOTES
and hae een the ehicles of US imperial argument in the idea of “glo al demo suppresses¢silences the oices of the other
ism for quite sometime no. Therefore, cracy ” and “glo al ustice” mediated read ple eian ictims, hich gets either
¥
Sen’s idea of ustice cannot e plural ut through imperialist agencies lie the UN, displaced or unheard. n this connection,
partial, since the prealent conditions of orld Trade rganisation WO, NGOs Sen’s “glo al dialogue” is impossi le pre
seeral forms of antagonism e
pressed in and corporate media. cisely ecause of the antagonistic nature
the phenomenon of poerty, inequality, Sen tries to mae a happy harmony, of glo al poer relations and can only
illiteracy, health ha¤ards, undemocratic arguing in faour of a glo al dialogue e
ist in the imaginations of an idealist
international disorder are consequences eteen the imperialist poer loc alli thiner, ho ironically is not interested
of corporate model of neoli eral capital ance of ashington, ondon, Paris and in proiding a transcendental ideal ust
ism. Already, Partha hatteree has inci Toyo ith “antiglo alisation protests” perfect society. £actually, such “glo al
siely shon us that “empire’s ision is a p ¡. Since eents lie inasion of raq, dialogue” has een proed to e counter
glo al democracy” hatteree Afghanistan, “glo al terrorism”, glo al productie as eident in the UN deli era
1. n fact, institutions lie the UN, NGOs economic crises, actiities of transnational tions, WO negotiations and climate
and media that Sen has so much hope for corporations and thus “institutions and change summits ith concerns of “orld
and trust in, hae themseles contri uted policies of one country influence lies else of the third” and their conflict ith the
in sustaining the current unust imperialist here” oth directly and indirectly, Sen alliance of imperialist poer loc. hen
system. Thus, it can e argued that Sen’s argues for a glo al dialogue ith the UN, WO and climate change tals fail, the
ision of furthering the reach of glo al oices of affected people p 1¥. ayatri imperialist poer loc coterie does not
democracy asically oerlaps ith the haraorty Spia 1¡¦¦ ¥¦, “the engage in selfintrospection, rather it con
proect of American empire remem er, quintessential argumentatie ndian” and tinues to pursue the same sets of oppres
the rhetoric of successie American presi Sen’s “lifelong friend” famously announ sie and e
ploitatie policies that affect
dents in faour of “glo al democracy” ced that “§t¨he su altern cannot spea”. the lies of significant sections of the
een ith unust ars ut ustifying those E
tending Spia, e ould argue that orld’s population. n this regard, the ide
heinous acts in the cause of democracy, een if the su altern speas ith an alism of “glo al dialogue” ased on rea
peace, freedom and ustice. ne can iden “authentic oice”, dominant loud oices of soned argument is effectiely reduced to
tify the logic of empire in the intellectual the metropolitan self read the empire “disengaged toleration”, ith the comfort
EPW esearch £oundation UNI O SMS US
www.epwrf.in www.epwrfits.in
India Time Series
A few months ago EPWRF introduced an online database service christened as ‘India Time Series’, www.epwrfits.in. The project envisaged provision of data
in twelve modules displaying time series on a wide range of macro-economic and financial sector variables in a manner convenient for research and analytical
work. This is targeted to benefit particularly students, research scholars, professionals and the academic community, both in India and abroad.
This online service is a part of the project funded by the University Grants Commission(UGC) and executed by the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS),
Mumbai and the Economic and Political Weekly (EPW).
After the successful launch of the first `financial markets module’ in January 2011, EPWRF is pleased to introduce two more modules, Banking Statistics [Basic
Statistical Returns (BSR)] and Domestic Product of States of India. Nine more modules will be added soon.
The demo version can be accessed by free registration. The existing members already registered with us and accessing member services at www.epwrf.in will
require no fresh registration. To gain full access, the subscription rates are:
Initial Subscription Rates Per Annum
Individuals Universities/Deemed Other Institutions
Universities or Colleges
According to Number of Concurrent Users According to Number of Concurrent Users
Up to 5 6 to 10 More than 10 Up to 5 6 to 10 More than 10
Financial Markets India (in Rs.) 5000 9000 15000 22500 12500 20000 30000
module Foreign (in US $) 200 500 1000 1500
Banking Statistics (Basic India (in Rs.) 4000 7200 12000 18000 10000 16000 24000
Statistical Returns (BSR)) Foreign (in US $) 160 400 800 1200
Domestic Product India (in Rs.) 3000 5400 9000 13500 7500 12000 18000
of States of India Foreign (in US $) 120 300 600 900
When subscription is made for two or more modules, a discount of 10% will be available on total initial subscription amount.
Initial Subscription is valid for one year and renewals on an annual basis will be available on a 30% discount over initial subscription amount..
For any further details or clarifications, please contact:
Director,
EPW Research Foundation,
C-212, Akurli Industrial Estate, Akurli Road, Kandivli (East), Mumbai - 400 101
(phone: 91-22-2885 4995/4996) or mail to: epwrf@vsnl.com
11¦ august 6, 2011 vol xlvi no 32 EPW Economic & Political Weekly
NOTES
of such la¤y resolution as “you are right in in fact forgets to mention the common in remo ing inustice than haing an ideal
your community and am right in mine” noledge that it as America’s on ust society is a selectie reading y Sen. t
p
, hich Sen himself criticises. This £ranenstein created as a strategy of cold is not clear, hy Sen decided to pose
only e
poses the selfcontradiction of his ar politics, hich is no haunting the ar
, not as an ideal perfect ust society
argument. e ould also add that the empire. So, America has to account for thiner n his Sen 1¡¡ engali oo,
impossi ility of glo al dialogue particu much of the present crisis in the ae of Jibonjatra O rthaniti iving and co
larly in an antagonistic atmosphere of glo al terrorism. Similarly, Sen also does nomics, Sen has referred to the classic
saagery of ar, economic inequalities not assess America’s unust historic rongs, ar
ian te
t The German Ideology, here
eteen rich and poor countries, and the most crudely e
pressed in decimating ar
Engels 1¡ argues a out the
inustices of poerty, lac of educational iroshima and agasai ith atom notion of human freedom in “communist
opportunities and poor health conditions om s, its military interentions and the society” and “true socialism”. Then e
in deeloping nations is a result of e
ploi entral ntelligence Agency sponsored no a out ar
’s 1¡¡¡a idea of distri
tation and oppression of the shining orld coups in parts of atin America and the utie ustice in a communist society
toards the suffering one. uslim orld, and its proselytisation of “from each according to his a ility to each
seeral third orld nation states ith according to his needs”, hich can e seen
Political s Practical Utilit £undan maret led economic policies as ar
’s on ustifications of perfectly
ne can also as a out the duality of that only sustained the pro lems of po ideal ust social arrangements. Similarly,
political ersus practical utility of Sen’s erty, inequality, unemployment, lac of the ideal of communism, hich y ar
’s
approach and hether e can argue for a educational opportunities and health ha¤ on admission is also a “real moement”
distinctie political utility for ust society ards. Today, this neoli eral consensus is y “transforming capitalist mode of pro
in an age of empire. f e can argue for facing a crisis of legitimacy oing much to duction” can e seen in his other ors as
6
such a case, then hat ould e the feasi the discredited economic agenda of glo al ell. The finality of ar
’s 1¡¡¡ polit
ility of any theory of ustice n the poer elites facing a massie financial cri ical imaginary of ideal perfect ust society
question of gap eteen theoretical and sis in the est. n this conte
t, as one of is e
pressed in one of his most famous
philosophical premises¢promises ith that the respected pu lic intellectuals of our quotes “communism is the riddle of
of practical performances in ground reali time, Sen stops short of adising the impe history soled, and it nos itself to e
ties at the grass roots, and ho e can rialist poer loc to reform itself, and not this solution”.
oercome this gap eteen academic to repeat its mistaes of historic rongs o, it is a legitimate question to as
engagements and real political actiism, and inustices to the orld population. that hy Sen does not read these ar
ian
Sen’s solution of glo al democracy and Sen is soft on the question of imperialism te
ts as transcendental ones. Sen’s treat
glo al ustice mediated through UN, NGOs, and aoids ehemently criticising it as a ment of ar
as a thiner interested in
WO and media is unimpressie. Sen system of inustice. To summarise the remoing inustice is correct, ut as e all
argues in faour of actiism ut does not a oe three fundamental disagreements no, ar
as also interested in esta
ela orate on the nature of actiism and ith Sen, e can say that the questions of lishing an ideal ust perfect society in his
¦
its specific direction – hether political antagonism, hegemony and imperialism ision of communism. £rom a ar
ist
actiism in faour of an imperialist status are a solutely missing in his oo and one standpoint, the critique of “transcenden
quo or an actiism negotiating ith the cannot comprehensiely understand the tal” y Sen inaria ly reinforces a our
imperialist poer loc or political strug notions of ustice and inustice ithout geois assault on the ery idea of reolution
gle against the ery form of imperialist addressing those issues. since he is prescri ing that there is no
order to transform the imperialist system point to loo for a reolutionary change
ould ensure a relatiely ust society. At isreading of ar ith an ideal of a perfect ust society.
est, Sen is arguing in faour of negotiat o do e address the gap eteen aca ather for Sen, it is prefera le to try and
ing ith imperialist poer loc y getting demic philosophy and political practice, remoe as much inustices as possi le
some doles¢concessions if possi le, and hich in a ay, ar
tried to resole the ithin glo al capitalism or etter say, to
not at all faouring transformation of issue Sen might argue that ar
’s com the e
tent capitalism gies that scope for
unust imperialist system to a radical dem munism is not feasi le and ar
treats remoing inustice. Therefore, Sen’s cri
ocratic alternatie of ust society. humans as animals, hile Sen alues tique of the transcendental is appended
Een Sen’s o serations of US inasion reason and treats human rationality as an ith a noncritical approach to capitalism
to raq as “mistaen” p ¥ and American important tool in dealing ith oth philo as ell. This acceptance of capitalism y
response to ¡¢11 “affecting hundreds of sophy and practice of remoing inustice. Sen ithout a transformatie agenda and
millions...in Afghanistan” p care n this respect, particularly Sen’s reading in fact eing critical to such a transcen
fully aoid using the term “imperialism” of ar
as a comparatiist than an ideal dental approach only maes him soft on
hich has perhaps ecome oldfashioned perfect ust society thiner is a misreading the issue of imperialism as e hae
in American intellectual circles as it of ar
ith a profound epistemological noticed earlier.
em arrasses the imperialist poer loc© pro lem in his thesis. The framing of ar
£or Sen, the ourgeois modernity of the
n the question of Tali an and ¡¢11, Sen among the comparatiists, more interested European enlightenment proect is an
Economic & Political Weekly EPW august 6, 2011 vol xlvi no 32 11¡
no reviews yet
Please Login to review.
