What would it mean for the institutions of finance to be democratized? I explore this question from a broadly Rawlsian conception of justice. In the first part of the paper I outline Rawls’s theory of justice. In the second part I briefly review what Rawls had to say about justice in the economic sphere. Notably, he thought that his conception of justice can only be realized in either “Property-Owning Democracy” or “Liberal Socialism.” I briefly explore the nature of these two “regimes,” before …
Read moreWhat would it mean for the institutions of finance to be democratized? I explore this question from a broadly Rawlsian conception of justice. In the first part of the paper I outline Rawls’s theory of justice. In the second part I briefly review what Rawls had to say about justice in the economic sphere. Notably, he thought that his conception of justice can only be realized in either “Property-Owning Democracy” or “Liberal Socialism.” I briefly explore the nature of these two “regimes,” before turning my attention to the institutions of finance, and in particular banking. In the third part I discuss the role of finance in contemporary liberal democracies, the social and political power that private banks are endowed with in such societies, and what problems this engenders from the perspective of justice. In the fourth part I argue that, among other things, the democratization of finance would entail wide dispersal of power and control over decisions about finance and investment. In the fifth and final part of the paper, I argue that there are reasons to believe that both of Rawls’s just economic regimes would fail with respect to the distribution of power and control in the economy.
