Comparison Of Karl Marx, John Rawls, And Robert Nozick

Great Essays
Karl Marx, John Rawls, and Robert Nozick are three prominent philosophers whose political theories have an important place in the modern political debate about the role of the state, how society should be structured and the concept of justice. Karl Marx was born 1818, his major work was The Communist Manifesto published in 1848. Marx advocated for a type of socialism called communism where the dominant goals are the abolition of private property and class antagonisms through a revolution of the proletariat or working class. John Rawls was born in 1921, his major work was A Theory of Justice published in 1971. Rawl’s defended social liberalism, egalitarianism, and the welfare state in the form of distributive justice. Robert Nozick was born …show more content…
A common critique of Marx’s ideas is that without the capitalist economic system there can be no progress, no motivation for people to work, however there are some cultures, for example many Asian countries (Japan) whose culture promotes work ethics not for material incentives but for the sake of recognition and pride.

Rawls John Rawl’s was one of the primary political philosophers of the 20th century, before his book A Theory of Justice, there had been no viable alternative theories to the utilitarian conception of justice which is to maximize happiness for the greatest amount of people. This theory when used to structure a state allows for practical decisions but it also creates a minority that can be disposed of for the benefit of a majority. Before Rawls’s conception of justice and the difference principle, the utilitarian principle was often used in politics justifying inequalities if they made all of us better off. Rawls twist on this is that it is not enough that it should make all of us better off it must make the worst off as well off as possible. Rawls believed in justice
…show more content…
Rawls looks at what the proper role of government should be and he begins with the idea that there are primary goods, which include both material goods and goods of rights or opportunities. It is societies job to figure out how to help us cooperate to distribute those goods in a just way. Rawls does not claim that those goods must be distributed equally, unlike Marx, Rawls is advocating for a welfare state not a communist state. Rawls separates the distribution of material goods and rights, and determines that there are certain rights that must be

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    Many philosophical scholars believe that justice, liberty, law, and equality are an important aspect among the commonwealth of the nation. Moreover, this paper will focus on the two important political philosophers that argue with the notion and importance of equality and justice in the western society. These philosophers include: Robert Nozick and John Rawls. John Rawls claims that equality and justice is derived from an equal distribution of opportunities, income, wealth, for the general social advantage of the citizen, which includes welfare. Whereas, Robert Nozick defines equality and justice as an entailment to oneself.…

    • 320 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Great Essays

    Now that the objection of self-interest has been refuted, the emphasis needs to shift towards an explanation of Rawls second principle of justice. The second principle, commonly referred to as the “Difference Principle,” indicates that, “[S]ocial and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to everyone’s advantage, and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all.” Rawls specifies that the “Liberty Principle” is “lexicographical”. This means that the principles are hierarchically ordered where the first principle must be satisfied before the second can even be considered.…

    • 1606 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Title Introduction (Thesis) America’s system of capitalism is a hot bed of inequality. Based on Rawlsian theory America’s current economic system, capitalism, is unjust. In Rawls, Property-Owning Democracy, and Democratic Socialism by Tom Malleson, capitalism is rejected for having unequal political power, unequal opportunity, and unequal wealth distribution. Unequal wealth is the major issue as it affects both political power and opportunity.…

    • 1004 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In the Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx attempts to educate the general public on the communist agenda that emerged in the 19th century. He proposes an arguably attractive explanation to the timeless class struggle in human history, explaining that the laboring proletariat class will eventually rise to political power and eliminate future class division and oppression through the seizure of property ownership. In essence, Marx favors the concept of the unity of the whole, whereas John Stuart Mill in On Liberty argues for the value of the individual and their liberties of thought, discussion, and action. In this essay I will defend Mill in justifying the utilitarian favorability of individuality and liberty rights, because prioritizing communal…

    • 1335 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Wealth inequality in today's society also known as the wealth gap, is growing. The top one percent makes twenty-five times more than the average family (Close 2016). This glaring inequality frequently brings up the question of what ought to be done with the distribution of wealth and resources. American Political Philosopher, John Rawls’, bases his argument on the premise that there should be an equal distribution of wealth in society. Robert Nozick, one of Rawls' main critics, demonstrates how distributive justice and an equal distribution of wealth conflicts with a person's individual liberty.…

    • 715 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Universal Health Care

    • 1019 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The world is naturally unfair. The role of government is to reduce natural inequality while preserving liberty. According to Rawls an unequal medical structure would be just only if the poor were better off under that system than the current. He emphasizes that this does not apply to the current American medical system. He also argues that congress opposed the current Medicare program as it was at the time considered socialized medicine.…

    • 1019 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Mass incarceration also creates a social hierarchy with Blacks being at the bottom because of being labeled a drug addict/user and a criminal, which in Rawls’ perspective is an injustice because its placing certain individuals higher than others. Rawls would view the situation the same as he viewed distribution of wealth and income, except the moral inquiry would now be the distribution of a negative good which would be punishment among individuals pertaining particularly to certain racial groups. Therefore, if Rawls proposed a solution, it would be that although there would still be some type of punishment institution to house those who are a severe threat to the community in order to protect society, we would choose arrangements that would respect the humanity of each individual. Also he would also examine the “social division of responsibility” between society and individuals. For example when we are about to arrest or convict an individual for possessing or deal drugs, one must also consider everything to ensure that each individual continues to face a decent opportunity for a good life.…

    • 1515 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    So, the first principle of Rawls - is essentially the principle of freedom. Basic freedoms are 1) political freedom (the principle of "equal participation" in the political process defined by the constitution), 2) the rule of law, or legal state 3) freedom of conscience. The second principle of justice of Rawls is formulated as follows that social and economic inequalities are to be settled in such a way as to lead to the greatest benefit of the least successful and that positions in society has to be open to all, with the subject of compliance with fair equal opportunity. Principles of justice Rawls relies on a strategy known in game theory as a "maximin" and implies the maximization of the minimum result. Thus, according to Rawls, the person in the original position inevitably chooses a society in which the least successful will be in the best possible position.…

    • 1009 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    This principle dealt with people’s liberty. These liberties were entitled to everyone and always remained. He believed basic liberties can be limited but, that only meant for the sake of liberty. To avoid harming the liberties of others. Rawls, second principle states “social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so . . .…

    • 349 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Rawls and Nozick: Justice as a Fair Inequality or Entitled Right? Distributive justice is the economic framework within a society which determines the distribution of goods amongst its members. How goods should be distributed and to whom have been interpreted by John Rawls and Robert Nozick, two contemporary philosophers that share the belief that there is no practical form of equal distribution of goods within society, but disagree on what constitutes a true distributive justice when taking that into consideration. The philosophers’ interpretations of distributive justice are influenced by their respective beliefs – Rawls’ principles of justice are egalitarian in nature, while Nozick’s entitlement theory is strong in its libertarian sentiments.…

    • 1178 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    John Rawls and Karl Marx both see equality as an important value in human society; indeed, they both see it as something people are entitled to and as the foundation upon which the ideal society is built. However, they diverge drastically in how they conceptualize the way an egalitarian society would operate and how they believe such a society could be achieved. Concerning the former, Marx envisioned a communist utopia, whereas Rawls was a strong believer in liberal democracy. In terms of the latter, Marx was a staunch believer in proletarian revolution, while Rawls believed in perfecting the existing system through democratic reforms. Their contrasting visions stem partly from the different periods in which they wrote.…

    • 1197 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Charles Mills Democracy

    • 2018 Words
    • 9 Pages

    This, he writes, is a hypothetical situation where political decision makers are rational, do not care about the affairs of their peers, have a sense of justice and what is good, and operate under a veil of ignorance. It is this same hypothetical veil of ignorance which is both the most important element to this theory working, but also what breaks it. Under a veil of ignorance, those making decisions on behalf of society will not know who they are going to be in said society. This, Rawls states, leads them to make moral decisions which, if anything, work to the advantage of the least fortunate. Unfortunately, as effective as this may actually be in addressing the issues with democracy today, there is no real way to carry this out in the real world.…

    • 2018 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Marxism The Crucible

    • 1524 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Imagine living in a world where no human oppresses another. Imagine living in a world where no one is poor and no one is rich. Imagine living in a world where the social class system is non-existent. Karl Marx, a 19th century philosopher, foresaw the image of this apparent communist utopia forming in every society; he expected the maltreated working classes to fight back against those who have immense, misused power. He believed that material possessions have a powerful enough influence on our lives to be considered the sole reason of historical change.…

    • 1524 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Once we have stepped behind this boundary we are able to think freely about the nature of social justice. Rawls’ suggests we think this way because by thinking from our emotionally charged subjective biases the truth may be blurred and one may put their values to an advantage in a matter involving who may be guilty or innocent. The idea is to think from pure logic and not be blinded by who we are individually. The two principles consist of the Principle of Equal Liberty and the Difference Principle. The Principle of Equal Liberty follows the egalitarian concept that each person has an equal right to the most extensive liberties compatible with similar liberties for all.…

    • 800 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Karl Marx presented Marxism as a way of understanding class divisions in the world that were based on the emphasis on materialism. Marx proposed a society without money or class divisions, diminishing the idea of materialism and capitalism, instead offering that equality in a society is based on how a society is run. Marx’s claims stemmed from an ideological perspective that individuals are more inclined to their wants instead of their needs, he offers that a society must work in a way where not just one individual but an entire society must give what they can to their state or government and take what they need not what they want. Doing this, Marx argues, will remove class conflict and monetary disparities. Marx idealized a utopia of equality for all, not just a certain few.…

    • 812 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays