Equality, Participation, Transition: Essays in Honour of Branko Horvat

First, people object to severe deprivation, including people’s lack of
access to an adequate diet, health care, and personal and economic
security, particularly when the rectification of these lacks would not be
unduly costly to others.
Secondly, unfair treatment, including discrimination by race, gender,
religion and sexual preference, as well as some forms of privilege transmitted
from generation to generation, excite widespread condemnation.
Thirdly, socially contrived inequality that deprives people of dignity
and the capacity to pursue full lives is generally seen as reprehensible.
Displacing the target of egalitarianism from income to more fundamental
determinants of dignity and well-being does not reduce the
importance of economics in the pursuit of a more just society. But it
does make clear that forms of egalitarianism which provide a basis for
personal autonomy and effective voice in shaping one’s life trajectory
should be given priority. We believe that the asset-based strategy we
have outlined does just this.
A second implication of the above is that the necessity to contain
costs of pursuing egalitarian strategies is not simply an unfortunate
constraint imposed by the veto power of the well-to-do. Costs
imposed on others affect the political viability of egalitarian programs
in a democratic society because, for wholly defensible reasons, people’s
concerns are not limited to the well-being of the least well off.
Egalitarian policy must therefore be based on the willingness of nonwealthy
citizens to support policies that redistribute in favour of the
less well off among themselves.
The poor showing of egalitarian projects in recent years has convinced
many that it is naive to expect support to be forthcoming from
a selfish and indifferent electorate. This pessimism is fundamentally
misdirected, however. It misunderstands the reasons for opposition to
egalitarian programs, and it underestimates the ability of egalitarians to
design redistributive programs capable of evoking deeply-rooted
human commitments to justice. Unlike many who suspect that the
basis for an egalitarian movement collapsed with the demise of socialism,
we discover a solid foundation for cooperation and sharing at the
root of human motivation.
3.3 Homo reciprocans: the motivational
basis of sustainable redistribution
Samuel Bowles and Herbert Gintis 33
The modern welfare state is but a single example of a ubiquitous social
form. Sharing institutions, ranging from families, extended gift giving,