Rawls on Justice: A Vision for Equality Against the Backdrop of Trumpism

Introduction to Rawls on Justice

Rawls on Justice originated in 1971 when John Rawls revolutionized modern political philosophy with A Theory of Justice. He invited us to consider what kind of society rational people would design if they didn’t know their future place in it. This “veil of ignorance” strips away

biases, compelling us to prioritize fairness, equality, and opportunity for all. In a Rawlsian society, individuals would build systems that safeguard basic rights and ensure a decent standard of living for everyone, regardless of their starting point in life.

Contrast this with Trumpism, which borrows heavily from Ayn Rand’s celebration of selfishness, free markets, and minimal government interference. In addition, Trumpism relies on a Radical Right Wing ideology that favors a small government, and minimum taxes on the wealthy while the rest of us pay for the administration of the government. You know all too well that for nearly a century, the right claims that wealth will trickle down for the rest of us. Trumpism exalts the individual who “wins” at any cost, often at the expense of the collective good. Where Rawls envisions justice to ensure societal harmony and equity, Trumpism intensifies divisions, rewarding wealth and power while marginalizing those who lack them.

Rawls on Justice: Economic Equity Versus Market Exploitation

Rawls argued that justice requires redistributing resources to uplift the most disadvantaged. This principle informs policies like progressive taxation, universal healthcare, and free public education. Consider healthcare: Rawls’ philosophy would support Medicare for All or similar programs, ensuring no one suffers due to unaffordable medical bills. In contrast, Trump’s policies repeatedly sought to repeal the Affordable Care Act, risking coverage for millions without offering substantial alternatives. His administration’s priorities left Americans vulnerable, reinforcing systemic inequities.

Rawls also emphasized fair labor practices. Rational actors, under the veil of ignorance, would create systems where workers are treated with dignity. In stark contrast, Trump’s labor policies weakened protections. The rollback of overtime pay rules and attempts to erode union power benefited corporations while leaving workers more vulnerable. For instance, workers at Amazon and Tesla faced hazardous conditions and union-busting efforts, while the administration offered no meaningful support to address these inequities.

Rawls on Justice: Education as a Right Versus a Commodity

Rawls insisted on genuine equality of opportunity, which requires robust public education. Rational actors would demand systems that guarantee every child, regardless of their socioeconomic background, has access to quality schooling. Trumpism’s emphasis on privatization undermines this principle. Policies promoting school vouchers redirect funds from public schools, widening the gap between wealthy and poor communities.

Rawls’ approach would also address systemic inequities in higher education, such as the crushing burden of student loan debt. Under Trump, the administration rolled back regulations on predatory for-profit colleges, leaving students—particularly low-income individuals—vulnerable to exploitation. Rawls’ vision, by contrast, prioritizes access and affordability, recognizing that education fuels equality and social mobility.

Rawls on Justice: Democracy Versus Authoritarianism

According to Rawls, a just society must ensure equal participation in the democratic process. Rational actors would reject policies that disenfranchise voters, as fair representation is foundational to justice. Trumpism’s voter suppression tactics—like purging voter rolls and

limiting access to mail-in ballots—stand in direct opposition to these principles. These measures disproportionately affect marginalized groups, consolidating power among the privileged and eroding trust in democratic institutions.

Rawls also valued truth and public accountability, key ingredients of a functioning democracy. Trumpism, on the other hand, weaponized misinformation to divide and polarize. False claims about election fraud, amplified by the administration, fueled public distrust and culminated in events like the January 6th Capitol riot. Rational actors designing a society under Rawls’ veil of ignorance would reject such chaos, understanding that stability and fairness depend on truth and integrity.

Rawls on Justice: Environmental Justice Versus Deregulation

Environmental justice aligns seamlessly with Rawls’ philosophy. Rational actors would design policies that protect natural resources, recognizing that environmental degradation disproportionately affects the most vulnerable. Trumpism, however, pursued aggressive deregulation. By rolling back Obama-era environmental protections, withdrawing from the Paris Climate Agreement, and opening protected lands to drilling, the administration prioritized corporate profits over public health and sustainability. Communities in Flint, Michigan, and along the Gulf Coast bore the brunt of these policies, while wealthier areas largely avoided their consequences.

Rawls would advocate for policies that address these injustices, such as carbon taxes and green infrastructure investments. Trump’s approach exacerbated disparities, leaving disadvantaged communities to grapple with environmental disasters without adequate support.

Conclusion: A Stark Divide Between Fairness and Division

Rawls’ vision for justice offers a blueprint for a fair and equitable society. By focusing on fairness, equality, and collective responsibility, his principles promote policies that prioritize the well-being of all. In stark contrast, Trumpism advances a worldview rooted in selfishness, deregulation, and the consolidation of power among the elite.

Where Rawls envisions universal healthcare, Trumpism strips protections from the most vulnerable. Where Rawls demands robust public education, Trumpism redirects resources to privatized systems that deepen inequity. And where Rawls values democracy and collective participation, Trumpism undermines these foundations with voter suppression and misinformation.

Rawls challenges us to think beyond our personal circumstances and consider what is fair for everyone. His ideas remain profoundly relevant in a world where inequality and division threaten societal cohesion. By embracing Rawlsian principles, we can work toward a society that values justice, dignity, and opportunity for all—an aspiration that directly counters the destructive tendencies of Trumpism.

Sources Cited

Brennan Center for Justice. (2021). Voting laws roundup: 2021. Retrieved from https://www.brennancenter.org

Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Harvard University Press.

Tax Policy Center. (2018). Distributional analysis of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Retrieved from https://www.taxpolicycenter.org

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. (2017). Paris Agreement. Retrieved from https://unfccc.int

Suggestions for Further Reading

Sandel, M. J. (Justice: What’s the Right Thing to Do?) – A contemporary discussion of justice in public life.

Sen, A. (The Idea of Justice) – A critical extension and challenge to Rawls’ theory.

Rand, A. (The Virtue of Selfishness) – Understanding the ideological roots of Trumpism’s policies.

Nozick, R. (Anarchy, State, and Utopia) – A libertarian critique of Rawls’ redistributive principles.

Klein, N. (The Shock Doctrine) – Insights into neoliberalism’s impact on governance.

Piketty, T. (Capital in the Twenty-First Century) – Analyzing income inequality and its societal impacts.

Rawls, J. (Political Liberalism) – Rawls expands his ideas on justice.

Chomsky, N. (Requiem for the American Dream) – A critique of wealth concentration in modern democracy.

Wilkinson, R., & Pickett, K. (The Spirit Level) – Exploring the relationship between equality and societal well-being.

DISCLAIMER: The images [and videos] in this post are AI-generated creations intended purely for illustrative and conceptual purposes. They are NOT real-life representations and must not be interpreted as such. The singular purpose of the included images is to offer a visual means of exploring the ideas expressed in this post and nothing more.