Zucker Presents Original Research to Students and Faculty

Political Science Professor Discusses Democratic Distributive Justice

On Monday April 6, approximately 60 students YC and SCW students gathered to hear Political Science Professor Dr. Ross Zucker discuss ideas he has developed based on his original research in the area of democratic distributive justice. Rabbi Shalom Carmy, Professor of Bible and Philosophy, and Dr. Aaron Levine, Professor of Economics, both attended the lecture and then commented from the point of view of their respective disciplines. Political Science Professor Dr. Ruth Bevan was also present.

Zucker began his discussion by asking a series of questions, including: Is democracy morally obligated to bring about a just economic order? How shall one examine the issue- by consulting authoritative opinions, or scientific analysis? Zucker then posed a situation in which the majority passes a policy that is morally questionable in terms of its economic justice, and he asked if one should then declare it undemocratic or unjust.

Zucker then began to distinguish between "substantive democracy," popular among seventeenth and eighteenth century political philosophers, and "procedural democracy," which is largely followed today. Substantive democracy is the idea that economic justice is integral to the ideal of democracy, and any political system that disregards economic justice is undemocratic and unjust. Procedural democracy is the idea that electoral procedures and democratic procedures are essential to democracy, as opposed to specific guarantees of economic justice.

Zucker then began to develop the idea that substantive economic rights are indeed an integral part of democracy. He envisioned an ideal society, "less statist than socialist democracy, but more egalitarian than the welfare state." In this democracy, redistribution would be a property right and there would be moral a obligation to apportion individual income in a more egalitarian way than market distribution alone would suggest. Therefore, democracy would be synthesized with distributive justice. People would still be accorded individual benefits such as remuneration for the value of their economic activity. This concept is known as dueness. Zucker said, "Each individual’s economic contribution has a social consequence which can accrue individual entitlements."

Rabbi Carmy then commented on Dr. Zucker’s propositions. Like Dr. Zucker, Rabbi Carmy began by asking a series of questions: What is right and wrong, and should our political organization tolerate wrong? Carmy answered that certain situations should not be tolerated, such as mass starvation while a select few gorge themselves. Theologically, we say that man is made in the image of G-d, and should therefore be opposed to oppression. Yet, this does not necessarily mean that economic equality is ideal. Carmy asked, "Do we consider man the consumer an admirable human being? Do we say, ‘I shop therefore I am?'"

Carmy then said that it would seem absurd to say that we have a right to be unequal. But, we could say that we have a right to be left alone in terms of our economic pursuits. He concluded that procedural justice is the second best option, but he was unsure of the best option.

Dr. Levine said that economic justice is an elusive concept. He said that in the United States, there is vast economic inequality, and very little area of economic consensus. Many economists believe that one cannot redistribute wealth. In a society, there are two types of consumers. One type are also producers, the engines of economic growth. The second type are parasitic consumers. Levine emphasized that society is based on self-interest. People want to end poverty and suffering, but everyone wants someone else to take care of the problem. Levine concluded that, "some amount of redistribution is possible if the government would practice coercion."

Zucker then answered questions from Dr. Bevan and several students. Apparently, students enjoyed the discussion as they continued to question Dr. Zucker half an hour after he had concluded and the discussion had to be moved to another room.

When asked how he found the lecture, Tuviyah Breier (YC ’01) said that, "I was pleased to see that Dr. Zucker’s oratory skills were even better than I had thought. His presentation was quite impressive and interesting." Aaron Lieberman (YC ’96) said, "I was intrigued by the interaction between machshava and economics that came out in the interchanges between the participants."