Page 124 [124]
122 I THE PHizosorny oF Eco-PoLirics
what. Iherefore, the authors of green political programs often see it as
their duty to declare their allegiance to ecological and social justice. Ihe
"and" immediately reveals that they are not aware of the essence of
political ecology: by ecology, they usually mean protection of nature and
by social justice, the proper sharing of goods amongst the competing
individual and group interests. Justice is everyone getting what they are
due by law. Who is due what can be decided based on universally
reasonable principles. All the more reason for the state to preserve its
neutrality in this debate. We will now argue against this opinion.
Let us bypass all the twists and turns of the debate'’ on the question
of justice that began in the house of Polemarchus circa two and a half
thousand years ago and take as our starting point how the match
currently stands. It seems that the majority of those debating the issue
accept as the basis of discussion the formula of equality of freedoms.
‘The debate revolves around whether the freedom of individuals should
be limited in the interest of some kind of material equality or whether
the freedom of competition for material and intellectual goods should
be tolerated or even encouraged, thus accepting its natural consequences:
social differences.’“ John Rawls’ theory of justice as fairness offers a
bridge. Its starting point is that what is just is what the majority sees as
such — or would see, if they were not influenced by their individual
interests. If “the veil of ignorance” were to hide from them their identity
and fate, i.e., they would have to decide without knowing whether they
will be men or women, sick or healthy, learned or ignorant, etc., they
would have to agree from purely rational considerations on a few formal
basic principles, the acceptance of which lies in all of their interests. The
most counter-arguments, however, were made precisely regarding Rawls’
starting point. His critics objected that if he abstracts from every
individual characteristic, why make an exception of logical thought and
13 The location of Plato’s dialogue The Republic.
14 Murray Bookchin, in Ecology of Freedom, represents a notable position. He believes that
fundamentally, people like to differ from one another and only demand equality if their
free interaction is limited by some kind of public restrictive institution. From this one
could even conclude to some kind of law of reciprocity of equality: the less freedom one
has, the more equality one will demand. Therefore, Bookchin breaks with the egalitarian
dogmas of the socialist left, especially with Marxism’s economy-centred perspective. He
places the rule of abstract relations and bureaucratic structures damaging the cohesion of
community at the centre of his social critique. The justice-performing socialist state, he
emphasises, is just as sensitive towards ecological problems as capitalism’s competitive
market economy. The harmonious coexistence of man and nature can be realised only in
the hierarchical society of self-regulating communities on a human scale. Bookchin: Beyond
Neo-marxism. Telos 36, 1978.