Nancy Fraser’s idea of Social Justice

Vivienne Bozalek

University of the Western Cape

Nancy Fraser’s three dimensational view of social justice

Social Justice

• Fraser (2008; 2009) views social justice as requiring social arrangements which make it possible for all to participate on an equal footing in social life– she calls this participatory parity

How have her views of social justice changed over the years?

• She has always viewed social justice from the perspective of participatory parity – how we are able to participate as equals but she originally saw it from a two-dimensional perspective (recognition and redistribution) – called a two dimensional view of social justice

• She now includes representation as another dimension into this view and calls it a three-dimensional view of social justice and she calls this a theory of post-Westphalian democratic justice

• All three dimensions are mutually entwined and reciprocally influence and reinforce each other but none are reducible to the other

• Efforts to work towards social justice must thus involve all three of these dimensions –the emphasis will be tactical and strategic

• She uses the slogan “No redistribution or recognition without representation” (Fraser, 2008:282) – all three conditions are necessary for participatory parity and none alone is sufficient

Why has she changed from a two- to a three-dimensional view?

• She argues that globalisation has changed the way that we see social justice

• We used to see social justice in terms of territorial states which are national states like South Africa

• This included socioeconomic redistribution and cultural or recognition claims

• In the age of globalisation, we can no longer take the territorial state for granted in thinking about issues of justice, as our lives are also controlled by transnational corporations and international currency, as well as INGOs and the global mass media and internet – we need to think of who should be included in redistribution and recognition – she calls this the frame of social justice

Social Justice from Fraser’s (2009; 2013) perspective – three-dimensional

• Recognition and misrecognition - economic

• Redistribution and maldistribution - cultural

• Representation and misrepresentation - political

Each one of these can be viewed from the following perspectives

• Affirmative

• Transformative

She looks at the what, who and how of social justice

Redistribution and maldistribution

• People can be prevented from participating as equals by economic structures which provide obstacles in terms of denying them the resources they need to do so – precludes economic structures that institutionalisedeprivation, exploitation and gross disparaties in wealth, income, labour, leisure time

• The problem here is class structure or the economic dimension of society – issues of education, health care, food, housing, water, electricity

• What are South African issues of redistribution in higher education which impact on how people in this country can participate as equals at this present moment?

Recognition and misrecognition

• People can be prevented from interacting as peers by the institutionalised hierarchies of cultural value that deny them the required standing – here they would suffer from status inequality or misrecognition which depreciates some categories of people and the qualities associate with them

• Recognition requires a status order where there is equal respect for all participants and equal opportunity for achieving social esteem

• The problem here is the status order which is the same as the cultural dimension of society struggles over – race, gender, sexuality, religion, nationality etc

• What are South African higher education issues of recognition which impact on how people can participate as equals at the moment?

Redistribution and recognition

• These two dimensions don’t mirror each other but do interact with each other to impact on social justice or participatory parity

• Neither class or economics nor culture can explain social justice and injustice

• That is why she proposed a two-dimensional theory of justice

• But now she thinks this two-dimensional theory doesn’t go far enough

Representation and misrepresentation

• This is a political dimension and concerns social belonging – who counts as a member of the community or who is included and excluded of those entitled to a just distribution and of reciprocal recognition

• It tells us who can make claims for social justice and how such claims are adjudicated

• Misrepresentation happens when some people are wrongly denied the possibility of participating as equals with others in social interaction

Representation and misrepresentation

• Two types – ordinary political misrepresentation e.g. race, gender, age etc

• Misframing – constitutes members and non-members in matters of redistribution, recognition and ordinary political-representation – very serious form of injustice – kind of political death

• What are South African higher education issues which impact on how is included in the political community who can air their claims? Are some communities wrongly excluded?

Representation and misrepresentation

• Misframing can be considered the defining form of injustice in the globalising age

• National states or the Keynesian-Westphalian frame prevents many poor and despised from challenging the forces that oppress them

• They challenge their own contexts – powerless or failed states

• This protects predator states (HEIs (Bozalek & Boughey, 2012), transnational foreign investors & governance structures, international currency and transnational organisations from democratic control and decision-making

Three dimensional view of justice

• Fraser (2008:283) asks the question:

How can we integrate struggles against maldistribution, misrecognition and misrepresentation within a post-Westphalian frame?

Affirmative and transformative approaches • Affirmative – contests boundaries of existing frames but accepts the Westphalian

grammar of frame-setting- redraw existing boundaries or create new ones but still think territorial state is appropriate unit to pose and resolve justice disputes

• Transformative – while state-territorial principle remains relevant for some purposes, it is not so in all cases

• Structural causes of injustices in globalising world include financial markets, offshore factories, global economy, information networks e.g. digital divide, climate, disease, drugs, weapons, biotechnology – not ‘the space of places’ but ‘the space of flows’ (Castells, 1996:440-460)

• Transformative politics of framing changes frame-setting in a globalising world –looking not only at the boundaries of justice but the way they are drawn

• All-affected principle - all those affected by a social structure or institution have a moral standing as subjects of social justice in relation to it – not geographic proximity but that they are all affected by a framework, which sets the rules governing their social interaction and which shapes their life chances of advantage and disadvantage – e.g. environmentalists and indigenous peoples – international social movements – seek to change the grammar of and democratise frame-setting making it dialogical – giving collective voice to those harmed

Affirmative vs Transformative

Misrecognition Maldistribution Misframing

Affirmative multi-culturalism liberal welfare statestill assumes legitimacy ofterritorial state

Transformative Deconstructionsocialism - deeprestructuring

changes boundaries ofjustice and how they aredrawn

Expanded view of affirmative vs transformative

Misrecognition Maldistribution Misframing

Affirmative

mainstream multiculturalism - surfacereallocations of respect to existing identitiesof existing groups - supports groupdifferentiation (Fraser 2008:34) revaluingblackness while leaving unchanged thebinary black-white code that gives the latterits sense (Fraser 2008: 36)

the liberal welfare state surfacereallocation of existing goods to existinggroups; supports group differentiation;can generate misrecognition

contests boundaries of existing frames but accepts Westphalian grammar of frame-setting. Redraw boundaries of existing territorial states or create new ones but stillassume that territorial state is the appropriate unit to pose and resolve issues ofjustice. injustices of misframing aren't a function of Westphalian political space butfrom faulty way in which principle is applied. Accept state-territorial principle.Accept principle of state territorality as the proper basis for understanding the 'who'of justice. They agree, in other words, that what makes a given collection ofindividuals into fellow subjects of justice is their shared membership of the politicalcommunity that corresponds to such a state. Thus, far from challenging theunderlying grammar of the Westphalian order, those who practice affirmativepolitics of framing accept its state-territorial principle.

Transformative

deconstruction deep reconstructuring ofrelations of recognition, destabilizes groupdifferentiation.

socialism -deep restructuring of relationsof production redistributing income orwealth, reorganising the division oflabour, changing the structure ofproperty ownership etc

state-territorial principle not adequate for determining the 'who'of justice in allcases - remains relevant for many purposes however. Structural causes of manyinjustices are global economy, digital divide, biopolitics of climate, disease, drugs,weapons, determining who will live long or die young - not the 'space of places'butthe 'space of flows. The aim is to overcome injustices of misframing by changing theboundaries of the who of justiceand the way they are drawn - the mode of theirconstitution - post-territorial mode of political differentiation. The 'all-affected'principle - all those affected by a given social structure or institution havemoral standing as subjects of justice in relation to it. e.g. environmentalists andindigenous peoples claims in relation to extra- and non-territorial powers thatimpinge on their lives or structures that harm them that cannot be located in thespaces of places. They are also claiming a say - democratising the process by whichframeworks of justice are drawn and revised. They are also then transforming the'how'as well as the 'who'. Transformative movements are demanding or creatingthemselves new democratic arenas for entertaining arguments about the frame.

References• Bozalek V 2012. Interview with Nancy Fraser. The Social Work Practitioner-Researcher, 24 (1): 136-151.

• Bozalek, V. and Boughey, C. 2012. (Mis)framing Higher Education in South Africa. Social Policy and Administration 46(6): 688–703.

• Bozalek, V. & Carolissen, R. (2012) The potential of critical feminist citizenship frameworks for citizenship and social justice in higher education, Perspectives in Education, 30(4):9-18.

• Fraser,N. (2000). Rethinking Recognition. New Left Review, 3 (May/June): 107–20.

• Fraser, N. & Honneth, A. (2003) Redistribution or recognition? A Political-Philosophical Exchange. London: Verso.

• Fraser, N. (2003) Social justice in the age of identity politics: Redistribution, recognition and participation. In N. Fraser & A. Honneth Redistribution or recognition? A Political-Philosophical Exchange. London: Verso pp7-109.

• Fraser. N. (2005) Mapping the Feminist Imagination:From Redistribution to Recognition to Representation. Constellations, 12(3):295-307.

• Fraser, N. (2009) Feminism and the Cunning of History. New Left Review, 56:97-117.

• Fraser, N. (2008). “Reframing Justice in a Globalizing World in K. Olson (ed.). Adding Insult to Injury: Nancy Fraser Debates her Critics. London: Verso, 273-291.

• Fraser, N. (2009). Scales of Justice: Reimaging Political Space in a Globalizing World. New York: Columbia University Press.

• Fraser, N. (2013). Fortunes of Feminism: From State-Managed Capitalism to Neoliberal Crisis. London: Verso.

• Holscher, D. & Bozalek, V. (2012) Encountering the Other across the Divides. Re-Grounding Social Justice as a guiding principle for Social Work with refugees and other vulnerable groups. British Journal of Social Work, 42 (6): 1093-1112 doi: 10.1093/bjsw/bcs061