What Is The Basis For The Maintenance Of Justice In The State

Generally, the distributive justice theories attempt to distinguish the causes of inequality, to identify what factors are people who themselves should be responsible for, and what factors are external and accidental, so that they can establish the standard and basis for reasonable distribution of the society. The distribution of initial resources, political rights, status and opportunities can be called Pre-market distribution, this kind of distribution try to provide a fair starting point for people before entering the market, so that people can have equal competitiveness in market competition. Distribution problem among market transaction depends on the market’s self regulation, this kind of distribution can be called distribution of market, it devotes to ensure the justice of the process. While redistribution and coordination to the result of market transactions through the state, by means of taxation, social security redistribution, policy support, are usually called after-market distribution, it means to ensure the equality of the final results, so that the distribution between all the people of the society can be on a relatively equal level. Among the three kinds of distribution, we usually do not think the distribution of the market should be intervened, because we are now under the condition of market economy, the market has its own discipline and operation system. So the distributive justice we will talk in this paper will be focused on the non-market transactions section. If we want to discuss the role of the state in the maintenance of distributive justice, we should first talk about whether the distribution by the state is possible, that means whether the state has the right to redistribute the results of market allocation, whether this kind of redistribution will offend some people’s individual rights or not. Secondly, we should further find out whether the state has the obligation to redistribute the result of the market allocation, that is, if the poor s basic needs should be satisfied just because they are human beings, so that the state should do the redistribution, for example, Nozick holds the opinion that the redistribution from the state is the depreciate to personal autonomy and the overlook to human dignity, so that this kind of redistribution is unreasonable. Finally, if the above two questions are committed to explore the basis of the rationality of the general principles of national redistribution, we need to implement the distributive justice, to discuss how national redistribution can be achieved, namely we should talk about the object, boundaries, and the way of state redistribution. The discussion of the role of the state in the maintenance of distributive justice in our paper will be from the starting point of the analysis in Rawls s "Theory of Justice", and I will try to clear this problem through the analysis of Nozick’s criticism who is Rawlss main opponent. As is known to all, Rawls firstly proved the rationality of distributive justice through the form of contract theory, and then tried to eliminate the inequality on the starting point through the principles of equality of opportunity, then, through the difference principle, he intended to further correct market inequality of initial distribution results. Therefore, this article will take the debate between Rawls and Nozick as the background to try to answer the above three questions.