progressivism, individualism, and the public ... - Telmarc Group

The Telmarc Group
PROGRESSIVISM, INDIVIDUALISM, AND THE PUBLIC
INTELLECTUAL
justified by some payment of some form to the Leni Lenape? Or what if I allow the Leni
Lenape to still hunt the deer, and in fact I now pay them to hunt the deer in return for my
claim being complete, is this an initial entitlement or a transfer, or is this really two
entitlements plus a transfer. The Leni Lenape were hunters, they used the land to hunt
deer, my farm attracts more deer, they still hunt, and thus two property interest now exist,
the hunting and the farming, and there has been no dissolution of the former.
Now to retribution. The issue of retribution for slavery come to mind. Minorities whose
ancestors were slaves may clearly have a right to retribution under the entitlement theory
of Nozick. Yet what of one of African descent whose family never lived in the US, what
claim would they have? What of the "retribution" type claims of Hispanic "minorities",
what validity would they have under Nozick's theory of entitlement. One could argue
none, that any Hispanic distribution would be Rawlsian and not following Nozick.
However any affirmative action targeted at direct descendents could readily be ascribed
as following Nozick and retribution entitlement. What then of a descendent who is say
only one eighth a descendent of a slave, the other seven eights are non slave descendents,
say free immigrants from the Massachusetts Bay Colony. Is there then some way
specified by Nozick? Apparently not but he did not detail process and would not reject
out of hand such a claim.
Wolff states regarding the entitlement theory of Nozick 138 :
"Nozick seems faced with a dilemma. Does he assert the legitimacy of the no-more-than
minimal state and ignore distributive justice or does he accept the burden of providing
for distributive justice and thus give up the idea that the minimal state is the most
extensive state … This is the role of his entitlement theory of justice … Nozick … implies
that the role of the entitlement theory is secondary; it is an answer to a problem caused
by the minimal state. … Within Anarchy, State and Utopia we can discern three distinct
defenses of the state. First, … defense based on the … refutation of anarchism. Second,
defense … based on the entitlement theory of justice. Third, the minimal state can be
recommended as a neutral framework within which one may design and live one's own
utopia. …
Nozick's real opponents are those - conservative, liberal, or socialist - who believe there
is a reason to adopt a more than minimal state. In the end everything rests on the
entitlement theory."
Indeed the minimal state is a concern. For libertarians the minimal state is the end goal
and individuals look at society as a single mass and at times they are at war with that
mass. For the individualist the individual and their rights, negative at a minimum, are to
be protected. Thus the entitlement theory if expanded in a more social context states that
it is the agreements entered freely by individuals, acting alone or in consenting groups,
138 Wolff, Nozick, pp 73-75.
Page 128