Within Rawls’s theory of justice lies an endorsement of a ‘Property-Owning Democracy’ as a regime-type which has the capacity to meet the institutional demands of justice. In contrast, ‘Welfare...Show moreWithin Rawls’s theory of justice lies an endorsement of a ‘Property-Owning Democracy’ as a regime-type which has the capacity to meet the institutional demands of justice. In contrast, ‘Welfare-State Capitalism’, characterised by redistributive practices, is dismissed as incapable of realising the values of justice as fairness. This thesis presents a challenge to the alleged superiority of a ‘Property-Owning Democracy’ over welfare state regimes. Through an exploration of the concept of predistribution, it is demonstrated that there is conceptual space between ‘Property-Owning Democracy’ and ‘Welfare-State Capitalism’ for a ‘Predistributionist Welfare State’. It is then argued that when a Rawlsian normative framework, consisting of accounts of the values of political liberty, equality of opportunity, reciprocity and social equality, is invoked to evaluate the opposing regime-types, a ‘Predistributionist Welfare State’ performs at least as well as a ‘Property-Owning Democracy’. This leads to the conclusion that Rawlsian philosophers lack a decisive set of reasons to reject the welfare state outright in favour of a ‘Property-Owning Democracy’.Show less
Approaching the turn of the 21st century, many scholars and media experts anticipated that the advent of the Internet could provide a powerful and profound source of democratization; facilitating...Show moreApproaching the turn of the 21st century, many scholars and media experts anticipated that the advent of the Internet could provide a powerful and profound source of democratization; facilitating not only instantaneous and costless information dissemination but also uniquely enabling a two-way ‘many-to-many’ pathway of political communication. Two decades on and notwithstanding this utopian vision, democracy, once again, appears caught in a state of crisis. With populism on the rise and political disengagement reaching record levels, questions regarding the tangents that connect democracy and technology must be critically reengaged. Working in this vain, this thesis sets out to test the relation between search engine technologies and the deliberative model of democracy. Looking specifically at the ideals of equality, autonomy and public justification, we ask whether the algorithms underwriting search engines invite or inhibit the realization of democratic deliberation.Show less
In recent years, distributive justice has been increasingly concerned with the elimination of disadvantages for which individuals are not responsible. Ideally, these misfortunes should be relieved...Show moreIn recent years, distributive justice has been increasingly concerned with the elimination of disadvantages for which individuals are not responsible. Ideally, these misfortunes should be relieved by those whose fortune is not their responsibility. This is the core of responsibility-egalitarianism. This thesis asks how can it be possible that a society accomplishes a responsibility-egalitarian distribution of economic inequalities. More specifically, I discuss the real-world possibility of (re)distributing economic inequalities according to a specific version of responsibility-egalitarianism. If possible, this version would ensure that all disadvantaged individuals are able to avoid the economic disadvantages they face. I use Ronald Dworkin´s proposal for equality of resources as an example of this responsibility-egalitarian distribution and assess its application in the real-world by means of taxation. My thesis is that a responsibility-egalitarian distribution of economic inequalities is possible by means of a new form of progressive income taxation. Establishing this scheme gives individuals the real ability of choosing to avoid misfortunate economic circumstances.Show less
In this thesis an answer will be given to the question what the effects are of privatization on the access to education and whether it is desirable that education is privatized – and if so, in what...Show moreIn this thesis an answer will be given to the question what the effects are of privatization on the access to education and whether it is desirable that education is privatized – and if so, in what way. To determine an answer to this question this thesis will first present different arguments in favor and against privatization in general and then introduce four different forms of provision. Consequently, the earlier presented arguments will be applied to the four different ideal types of provision for the case of education. In the end this thesis will conclude that some form of privatization is desirable, as it generates a higher degree of efficiency and therefore reduces the cost of educational provision. However, since a purely privatized provision of education is subject to undesirable consequences - such as problems with equality of opportunity - this thesis states that a privatized supply side is the best form of educational provision, because it entails efficiency and equality of opportunity.Show less
This paper is to illuminate the social significance of positional goods and to assess the desirability of equality of these goods. I begin with a characterization of strict and moderate...Show moreThis paper is to illuminate the social significance of positional goods and to assess the desirability of equality of these goods. I begin with a characterization of strict and moderate egalitarianism and their implications about equality; and I discuss the leveling down principle as well as its objection. Further, I turn to the issue of positionality and non-positionality; define positional goods; clarify the distinction between positional goods with non-positional aspect and non-positional goods with positional aspect; and demonstrate what a notable case equality (and leveling down) of positional goods is in the field of political philosophy and economics. I then proceed to an elaborate discussion about the desirability of equality of positional goods. I conclude that equality of these goods is not desirable and defend this claim on three egalitarian grounds: (1) non-positionality; (2) social growth; and (3) fair competition.Show less
