Justice and Marginalization, Essay Example

Justice could be considered a relative concept since its interpretation varies from one society to the next. For example, Nicola Machiavelli(1469 -1527) perceives justice as the end justifying the means (Oppenheimer, 2011). How does this interpretation affect marginalization within any society; is the phenomenon that will be explored in this essay. WhenNicola Machiavelli (1469 – 1527) declared that the end justifies the means as an interpretation of what justice is it could be that if a person commits murder to achieve a goal then there is no injustice contained in the action. Therefore, if one were to examine slavery/slave trade and segregation within the society it would be considered fair to the perpetrators because the end justified the means.

The justification for slavery during the 17^th, 18^th and 19^th century is that slaves provided labor in maximizing profits for planters. Subsequently, a new world developed, Europe became wealth and Great Britain a world power. Even though slaves were considered cargo, being dumped overboard to reduce weight on ships during the middle passage, the end justified the means because the purpose was to build a new empire and make a nation Europe wealthy.

In the same way the slave trade outcome justified the purpose. As such, it was not considered wrong from a Machiavellian (1469 – 1527) perspective because this was they provided the most suitable plantation labor force after experimenting with Indians and other races. Africans were strong and withstood the harsh weather. Similarly, segregations in America during the early 20^th century and late 19^th has served to stratify society whereby the powerful could maintain their rulership while a powerless are being marginalized.

However, when justice is taken within a wider context it is viewed as moral correctness emerging from ethics, religious perspectives; a premise of equity; law and rationality. My argument is that if justice is executed with fairness marginalization would not occur in society.The examples offered earlier whereby slavery/slave trade and segregation were viewed as just from aMachiavellian (1469 – 1527) ideological paradigm are  in fact strategies promoting marginalization. Segregation laws promote social exclusion. How then could the end justify the means when social exclusion ultimately has been the outcome of slavery/ slave trade and segregation in America?

From this perspective I cannot agree with Machiavelli’s (1469 – 1527) perspective of justice even though in modern societies these strategies are still being used in acquiring political, power. For me a just society is one exercising democracy in its true sense. Democracy is expected to provide fairness in governance whereby people have a chance to vote and make political decisions for themselves. They are allowed to participate in their governance and not have it dictated to them. According to arguments put forward by Confucius (551–479 BC) and other political philosophers this constitutes a just society. In other words a just society is one in which there are no huge gaps between those who have enough and persons without anything at all.

Importantly, it is a society in which all people with the same academic, social and physical capabilities have equal opportunities of achieving the same goal/goals. Structured inequality does not exist in those social settings whereby due to the color of a person’s skin they have exceptions or privileges above others within the social environment as during segregation in America. BothMachiavelli (1469 – 1527) and Confucius(551–479 BC) contend that justice could be attained; Machiavelli (1469 – 1527) by justifying the means and  Confucius (551–479 BC) through fairness.

Works cited

Oppenheimer, Paul. Machiavelli: a life beyond ideology.  London; New York: Continuum. 2011. Print