The Just and Moral Society

On Saturday I attended and spoke at the biennial Vincentian Chair of Social Justice Conference at St. John's University (colloquially, the "biennial Poverty Conference"), sponsored by the Vincentian Center for Church and Society.  The conference theme this year was "The Just and Moral Society: From Ideal to Reality."  The day began with a keynote address by John Coughlin, O.F.M., who is on the faculty of Notre Dame Law School.  John examined four perspectives on the foundations of a just and moral society: philosophical, theological, ethical and legal.  The philosophical and theological discussion focused on the salient features of what it means to be a human person and the understanding of basic human goods derived from practical human reason.  He then talked about how the philosophical and theological perspectives shape the ethical and legal structures of a just and moral society.

The keynote was followed by a panel addressing current efforts at the international, national and local levels toward building a just society on behalf of the poor.  I was particularly struck by some of the comments made by Hon. Oscar de Rojas, Director of the Financing for Development Office in the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs.  He argued that, although distributive justice is broadly accepted in the United States, there is a lack of basic acceptance of the concept internationally, which impacts how we treat issues of debt, trade, etc.  He also suggested that while human dignity is accepted nationally, it is not thought of globally, with the result that people in one country feel no responsibilty for people on other countries.  Thus, actions taken on the international level that appear to promote social goals are thus taken only out when they promote self-interest, not out of a sense of solidarity.  (E.g., we'll work to save the Brazilian rainforest because that will prevent NYC from sinking into the Atlantic.)

My first reaction to his comments was to question whether there is, in fact, as broad acceptance of distributive justice in the United States as he suggests.  He said, for example, that no one in the United States questions progressive taxation of income, accepting the principle that those that have more should pay more.  I'd be intersested in the thoughts of others, but it strikes me that there is far less acceptance of distributive justice than he suggests.  Second, it seems clear that self-interest alone is not going to get us where we need to get.  Self-interest may work for the rainforest, but it is not going to address situations like Darfur.  It seems clear that we have to move beyond reliance on self-interest and be focused on how one develops a broader understanding and embrace of solidarity at the global human level.

The afternoon included six simulataneous workshops on such topics as political participation, sustainable development, health care, education, employment and respect and security.  Since I spoke at the program on The Right to and Responsibility for Employment, I can only comment on that and not on the other workshops.  The presentations (made by myself and by Milly Bilken, Staff Attorney for the Community Development Project of the Urban Justice Center in NY) addressed workers at both ends of the income scale - focusing on both executive compensation and efforts to secure the rights of low-wage workers.  The discussion after the presentations was lively and critical of the extent of income and wealth disparity in the country.  One question that generated a lot of attention (and one that I suspect MOJ contributors vary in their reaction to) is whether we should care only whether those at the bottom have enough or whether it is also the case, from the perspective of Catholic Thought, that there is a point at the upper end that is enough and beyond which is simply too much.

After the workshops, we all heard from Simon Aban Deng, a Sudanese refugee and former child slave.  Deng was abducted at the age of 9 and spent several years as a slave before being reunited with his family.  It is hard to believe that in this day there is still a place in the world where slavery is legal, where in Deng's words, one person can be given as a gift to another person. (The person who abducted him, gave him away to another person.)  His talk was very moving, very compelling.  Speaking about this period of his life is clearly painful for him, but he believes his message is one people need to hear.  As he said at one point, "When human beings decide to be silent, the atrocities will go on."  Deng's talk was videotaped and I am hopeful we will have internet access to the talk at some point soon.

The day ended with a beautiful Eucharistic Liturgy, celebrated by Thomas McKenna, C.M., Provincial of the Eastern Province of the Vincentians, a perfect ending to a really wonderful day of presentations and reflection.