In human existence, morality, ethics, and fairness are key factors that drive every person. The aspects of rightness emanating from these variances constitute justice. Therefore, justice entails fairness and equity in provision and determination of rights devoid of any discrimination. Such discriminations can be racial, gender, ethnic, faith or age as is determined by the Universal Human Rights. Justice ensures that regardless of one’s background, impartiality is administered in a nation. Social equity is akin to equality. The distinction emerges in the area of jurisdiction and manner of application. Take for instance, a family of two girls and two boys as children belong to Mr. and Mrs. Hansen. Equality will ensure that each kid gets a share of their needs in clothes in terms of number and such. However, equity analyses each child’s needs in terms of suitability and preference. As such, the girls may get their preferred dresses in preferred colors as the boys get their trousers and pants in blue, as they want it. This concept determines the elements of social equity. In the above sense, social equity ensures that everyone or major groups get what is justly right for them.
In the two concepts, a stalemate emerges as to their differences. They both have a close linkage when they deal with society and life. Social equity targets major groups in a society. In that case, women can have their rights, which fall under the label of social equity. The disabled may also get their rights under these statutes. In finer retrospection, justice analyses an individual for an element of fairness. In a group, people may have different needs that signify their existence. An instance is the aged who may need special attention and requirements based on their age classification. Social equity will attend to such groups; providing them with their needs. Justice will take an aged woman who has cancer and probably has no foster care and determine her fate.
Certain threats mar the concept of justice and social equity. As many critics observe, an objective standard of social justice exists, a premise that is objected by many moral relativists. These variances have created controversies on the basic level of value attached to all humanity. One major critic of the concepts of justice and social equity is Hayek, a professor from The Austrian School of economics. He argues in Hayek, 1973 that no test exists to discover social injustice. He therefore feels that social equity and justice are lame and unjustified in their true sense (p 153). These criticism and several other controversies are threats that have threatened the various national jurisdictions of these concepts. However, the upheld values surrounding these concepts are still evident and strong in the society.
Therefore, in the light of such controversial statements, society is also diverse and often in evolution. What we hold dear today may lose meaning tomorrow. As such, the concept of justice and social justice lacks a credible standard of gauge. As the different theories of justice demand, a concise value of individual differences must apply to determine the values of judgment. This is the theory of utilitarianism and retributive justice.
Reference
Hayek F.A. (1973). Law, legislation, and liberty, Volume 3, The Mirage of Social Justice,” Routledge.
James Konow (2003) "Which Is the Fairest One of All: A Positive Analysis of Justice Theories", Journal of Economic Literature, 41(4), p. 1188-1239
