Self-Contradictory of Young’s Statement
Social justice theory is on the rise in the current Western social science discourse. However, it is not without its flaws. The statement about unintentional oppression that Young made in her book, which can be considered a significant contribution to the theory of social justice, contradicts itself. Firstly, the question arises of who these many oppressive individuals are. Young did not clarify these groups of individuals.
In the theory of social justice, there is a dichotomy between oppressors and oppressed in human society. The concept of social justice is closely related to intersectionality. In intersectional theory, social identities can be both oppressive and suppressed. It means that those many individuals mentioned by Young are not agents of oppression only; they are also oppressed. The concept of the social relationship that Young described must be revised.
Another Paradox of Young’s Statement
The writer also argues that oppressive actions are conscious. However, she further notes that simple daily activities and practices reproduce oppression. Young’s statement is paradoxical in its nature. Oppression cannot be unintentional; it is always a deliberate practice. Therefore, the lifestyle of many people cannot be viewed as oppressive. It is necessary to mention that it is immoral to accuse entire groups of individuals of oppression.
It is also counterintuitive especially given the above arguments. Social justice theory is a promising concept, but like any new idea, it needs a significant theoretical background, the principle of consistency and self-criticism. Perhaps in the future, social justice and intersectionality theories would give people the necessary means to solve many social, political, and economic problems. Nowadays, both of them need to be given more time to develop as disciplines of philosophy and social sciences.