Structural Injustice and Self‐Development

Since the publication of Justice and the Politics of Difference (1990), Iris Young's thought has had a big impact on how social and political philosophers understand social justice. Young is known for arguing that injustice should be primarily defined in relational and structural terms of oppression and domination, rather than in terms of the unfair distribution of goods or resources, and for the arguments that claims within egalitarianism require group, rather than individual, comparisons on measures of well-being, thus providing an influential way of thinking about equality, difference, and justice (Young 1990, 192, 2001). A burgeoning literature on structural injustice is especially indebted to Young's work on structures of oppression (Browne and McKeown 2024; Lu 2017; Mantouvalou and Wolff 2024; McKeown 2024; Nuti 2019; Goodin and Barry 2021; Parekh 2011; Sangiovanni 2018). Despite this impact on our understanding of social justice, the deeper normative claims supporting Young's arguments are not as well known. In fact, most of the contemporary literature on structural injustice focuses almost exclusively on the issue of responsibility for the injustice (for an overview, see McKeown 2021), and there is little engagement with how Young conceived of what constitutes oppression itself—namely, the inhibition of self-development. Already in the abovementioned Justice and the Politics of Difference (Young 1990), Young argues that self-development is central to the idea of social justice, and that it is crucial to understand obstacles to self-development in a structural way, that is, through a lens of social practices, systems, and ideology. A decade later, in Inclusion and Democracy (Young 2000), Young developed this thought further, providing an account of structural injustice that explicitly centers on self-development. In contemporary literature on structural injustice, however, despite the paramount influence of Young and the centrality of self-development in her analysis, there is no systematic discussion of the relation between self-development and structural injustice. The purpose of this paper is to argue that thinking more carefully about this relation—often mentioned but rarely analyzed in detail—will help us to understand better the phenomenon of structural oppression, its perpetuation, and why it constitutes an injustice. In the rest of this introductory section, I will briefly reconstruct Young's analysis of oppression, provide an overview of the literature that connects self-development to justice, and set the stage for the paper by identifying the gaps and summarizing the structure of my argument. Young (2000, 184) argues that there are two fundamental general values that are the concern of justice: participation in determining (the conditions of) one's action—the value that most political philosophies are concerned with—and the development and exercise of one's human capacities. For her, the inequalities of wealth and power are unjust to the extent that they perpetuate conditions that inhibit these values, and something constitutes a form of oppression because it inhibits self-development (Young 1990, 192, 2000, 31–34). From these two values, Young derives the definitions of domination and oppression. The denial of self-determination corresponds to domination and refers to conditions in which people are inhibited from participating in determining their actions or the conditions of their actions (Young 1990, 38). The denial of self-development, in turn, corresponds to oppression and refers to systematic social processes that prevent some people from the development and exercise of their capacities in socially recognized settings; such conditions include material deprivation and negative relational aspects (Young 2000, 38, 156). Young's own discussion of self-development is rather brief and general: she “interpret[s] the value of self-development along lines similar to the values Amartya Sen calls equality as capabilities” and defines social justice as conditions where all can “learn and use satisfying and expansive skills in socially recognized settings, [which] enable them to play and communicate with others or express their feelings and perspectives on social life in contexts where others can listen” (Young 2000, 31–33). But this rather broad definition of self-development becomes even more indeterminate when we consider the purely procedural approach to capabilities by Sen himself, who, in to the of the of well-being, it in a (2000, has this of the normative of as a more that of from an explicitly normative value of human developed the approach a of justice, that to this she however, with the analysis of the of the structural form of oppression and more with the of Despite the of the relation between structural injustice and self-development, the of the of oppression as an inhibition of this value is a in the political philosophers on this or more general such as and the the fundamental work of our about a form of structural injustice. For McKeown in her analysis of the of power in the responsibility for structural injustice, argues that what a form of structural injustice is the that are from their for self-development and it is the inhibition of self-development and self-determination a form of structural In a similar way, Lu structural injustice as a to that to the of Young's to a value of self-development, however, there are no of what it is or how it is inhibited by structural oppression. political philosophers for a of self-development or a of justice it within the of justice and Justice or a of equality the most account of self-development and its relation to justice to but her work more on the of and of justice that such rather than on the of structural oppression and the of the of self-development. and in and explicitly their approach to structural injustice on a of human their however, is on of of the that constitutes a human and thus on that are because they of that a life and my despite the normative centrality of the of self-development in our understanding of structural oppression, there is no discussion of what self-development is, why it constitutes a and in what way structural oppression inhibits philosophers concerned with structural oppression are not about a of self-development in the of a of that can be a and of normative and a of social their on and how this inhibits self-development. I the normative of the of their In this I to a way of thinking about structural oppression and how it inhibits self-development. I will a of self-development, a of that its and argue for a way of thinking about the of structural oppression on self-development. will require a brief of the the of social structures and the of will be and some claims not I a broad of the way we should about the normative of the idea of structural In to that on the inhibition of self-development to deprivation of and unfair distribution of I will approach the of the relation between structural oppression and self-development by of structural of an within conditions and the of such on their self-development. The structure of the paper is as I with a of social Young's with in how we should understand structures and by and with the of their on by I the of the relational of social the of the normative of practices, and the power of such of a social is crucial because it can help us about what social structures us a and of what is in structural oppression, and provide us with a better understanding of the of the of oppression. In the of the I provide a of self-development and a of that its on by and I to understand self-development in terms of an exercise and development of one's capacities in the of one's for their own focuses on the structure that a life has rather than on the of a or the of one's or the of I of to the value of self-development. In the and of the I how structural oppression inhibits self-development. in and I thinking of the of structural oppression in terms of or an of of the social structures that in one's is a and how can it its I will by a but definition of what structure is, on social of Iris Young (2000, and I a social structure as an set of and a of a of social that and the A structure is a set of because it defines the and between A structure is a of because these social are by and are and to to the in a way, and in and as a form of to the of of a and these and a of not the way people to but the way people to to for Young and are they are however, but are and through the between structures are more in terms of processes and not of (Young social structures are conceived as and the of the in structures the practices, and practices, in turn, and structures (the of For a set of is by and on she defines as that can be a of power in social and the to the actions of and on are of thought and they of of and and provide for because they enable us to and and and are and in the that they are in as a set of to see the in a way and to to it and are and are by the of resources, and their is the of by resources, are as that them structures because and and A structural social is a of are in a of that conditions their of these are a in structural in relation to is, a social from the it is not by a set of between its but by the relation in which it to by practices, set of and and on (Young 2000, The structure of these on the of and of of and life are by these structural in that they systematic and is, structures that of people others on a The of an can thus be by the form of the structure and the in an by their and a in to resources, and and of these or self-development (Young 2000, understanding of structure and social us to the structures are by in which they are not are not in structures of we structures and by providing of that or thus the for by through the of the and of for thought and of even the of the are to are in what and how will by social and and these and be by own thought or because they on a form of understanding and through this understanding structure and and are not in that structure to actions and structure is by a central normative of social social and to and an of with actions in to relational and material is, are in them their own and for is an issue in about and when such in a and what be a for of such there is an of of the between and should be as of an is, of the of how the structures of the social and their are in two the of distribution of socially goods and values of and the of of or the and that as for the and of social and The is not something that a in the of social but is with social structure is, the social structure be from the because the and conditions this and social structure defines the for a social and conditions the and of in their structural through the distribution of goods and of in the that is, they for the of two is in the and the which social and In that the material the we which which the of the and the of that is to the of our actions and social to the that has to of the our to be for by the way the is a of the of social I will briefly some the of the structural not that social for be purely to structural the is that it can be by how actions and with the social The the of a set of socially conditions that people in a they to these conditions and are for the they these (Young 2000, to how structural conditions social practices, their own but they not it as they a is not to it structural conditions the of a by actions and others some more and others some and others to structures enable or the of and In when we structures and we not they they to we can of a structural as a on structural conditions of to the and how it can be conditions can from the and to and to in that work as and for we of in terms of we a better for why some people for of little to with one's and more with how the of and how it is to of them and it is that we not understand the structure as of the In the this understanding can be for that social and to as of the and Wolff and in their of structural an that social structures as a set of such however, is to understand the of by the by Wolff and argue that an for are and and and social and material structure which how and can be social and power of the of and with the social and material structure within which for for of and and we to provide an to we can in or and the social I not the between the and structural can be of the in this how well can with they and my But the social and material structure the and of the for the structure defines what as a for a of in the in the it that we can an their or resources, we the definition of by the of the structural for a socially In the structure is not of the Wolff and from the as the the of the from to social and material structure is the be as a that how we can use what we are to the section, the of that is, structures and and the relational of social and the on such the of the normative in social practices, and the of social structures through the power to and to social is because it will help us to better understand what is in structural oppression, which I will to The analysis of structural of oppression and domination is of the central of the A structural approach to a of that and are between social and how they can the of the from social processes that are the of the actions and of of such the structural be in terms of actions (Young it the of structural analysis is to how a for deeper than of the conditions of structural oppression include of of and or in and through practices, and the conditions of structural oppression in our to the of people the for of from that their in oppression include such as of and of of (Browne and McKeown of a structural approach is that it for of injustice for which no or of to be (Young 1990, 2011; Sangiovanni 2018). on such is in that in social and where the distribution of is not of for justice it be to a between actions and structural to the responsibility of the of for such structural injustice not from the of a but in the of of the that them (Young oppression, is in terms of the not by a political power or an but by from an set of how they are and the and by or not be in their is, structural oppression not be a of some actions and but from and of and and from the of and it refers to from the structural processes of the in which and their within the of and in of structural oppression there be are by structures and structures the of structural oppression that there not to be a that is and group, even it derives from the structure The are not in a it is social practices, and that the oppression and a within such In structural oppression is not a of relation between but a of social and that and the way it that an oppression is structural is to that there is a systematic and of of social in a oppression is not something that or to within but to of The of thinking of structural oppression in this way is that it focuses our on the structural of an individual, or the way structures are in by way of their relational of the social of social structures and how these structures can way to oppression will us in understanding how inhibition of self-development and how it becomes and The of the I to express through my is that we should of the inhibition of self-development the of the relational of social a structural of oppression. I to the of this arguing that the injustice of structural oppression is in the of the structural in the form of an to provide a definition of self-development and a of that its In to negative claims about the of we to an account of an human of on of human or on of human For a of of the terms in the literature that to of justice in a of human to be in an there is a with a set of capacities and that are to be in for to For this such are to of and of the can be we of social in a structural how we to a that is not on the idea of human or fundamental and their or that is, what be a more of human I that self-development can be as such a because it not an is and on the of can be thought of in terms of of a as a of the as a in the of this from a similar definition of self-development, argues that we the we of it in such a way in which not in what on these I the self-development is the exercise and development of one's capacities in the of one's for their own us this this definition that self-development to I to be to set my (for discussion see self-development is not as a form of or development of one's or of some is rather a way of it is an exercise and development of one's capacities in the of with the in which these human capacities our with the that we through that we and for their own is to their the however, self-development is, in a a more we set for that our capacities (for most people not for self-development the of the value of development not in its but in the exercise of one's human capacities that it and and as a of rather than the of a set of The on the of an exercise and development of one's capacities than on the of of or on the of or on the of what this it has a a understanding of an as and the through their 1990, can better the idea of an human the of and it the idea of on the structure that a life has rather than on its for the of of self-development is an exercise and development of one's a not to the of but to and exercise one's and human capacities in the of with the self-development is thought of in terms of in a way is, by and not in terms of a of or in terms of the of some set of or is not a I but the way I and the I is to their life to their own and this of self-development not an to self-determination but rather what we when we self-development is, however, not we to why it constitutes a value and what its normative In this section, on I will briefly a of that a of self-development. is and is the most of a of can be within the literature that in the of contemporary the discussion by The of and 2001). a of human in terms of the exercise and development of one's or for with an that value its of in relation to it is is for the to is a is because it is for that is, to the of is to the idea that or is for it and there is no such as that is for no human that is, there is no such as but for no is about the for is, when we is for we that is well for or in we to the of to argues we can something is for we some of is, for all is such when we to understand the of we how something can or of as we that is for and in the way of such is for argues that is the of development that of its by and their capacities and is, the of as the of or of or of the development of or of or of be by its to human that is not goods on an that it is to one's that is, the is not that we human and thus their development is for but rather we our about what is we a where the idea of human capacities to be and developed an in that of the of the of in the way they our this from rather than from an that it is for us to exercise our capacities is thus defined as the development and exercise of human and a life of is that such the structure or form of one's life rather than the of that it not the way in which such development to which capacities to is not a but an engagement with one's by way of a that one's and human capacities. The is not on a of but on the way their I the of can as the normative for the of structural injustice. how our of self-development and a of that such development as of human help us understand the of structural is, in the social in the in what way structural oppression inhibit human and in what way it such In the and section, I will thinking about that in terms of or an of of structure that in one's the I defined social structure as a set of within a of defined by practices, to a of and by the between and their material structural oppression as a systematic and of of social in such a structural a of self-development in terms of an exercise and development of one's capacities that a structure that a life has and a way of in the a of that why such self-development constitutes one's In what in these I to approach the phenomenon of oppression as a of to and I to understanding this in terms of as an form of one's is how structural oppression inhibits one's self-development not but the from a life and an injustice. is to to the of oppression as something that and For for an understanding of oppression primarily in terms of structure of and which to the and of a or of and in argues that the to a that the injustice of structural oppression is the and to one's the of how they are and and the of oppression in their of an to the of these and in social and political and the of the of oppression, it is to a that or such as a form of the of oppression. there is little of how social structures and to such and that are a social In a of the of social that the and influence of on with the the power of some of to their a in structures of its to be about and some people and with the of on the of the But the of are more are to in the that are the structural with deeper is in the structural of capabilities to the and of one's own argues that it is social or the structural of domination, that to the of which and the of social these to be in one's an that can be especially in understanding how social structures and thus the of the of structural oppression on self-development. defines as as a that the material and conditions of one's can be in terms of a of and and that the in which and to the social and as an of social structures which but are in socially and the of and I to the that of the (the way one's and of of two aspects of the are socially and they to the social and thus social when I that an of social I that it is by and their that is, we to these and not to a we in the with a for a of that the of social it to be people with similar and the way structural an is, through the structural and in in the form of and of and and The of us to of as by structures and structures through their own For as they in a them in which we are not to the to our is a for in or to in more than to to approach the to the of a us as it and our is to or from its approach a engagement with with and the to in a or of and is such that the as and on the it that for has its of and in are as we to our in with the definition that to we are and we are not and which to a that to a by our own and of structural social are within that are or most for a form of life or through of The that such the between or of an and a social The of such of one's to the of one's material conditions and social with one's idea of the of a of and of the of that is, becomes in one's of and their it through and of social through the the of and in the social and and can to the on the a on the the and the development of one's capacities are set by a of social and work to and it for and The of and and A of of the of the relational of social how the influence of oppression becomes through the of and in a social because of the material conditions in which of the but because an be it and can in what should which is by a structural is in its form the of in to a social is defined by the of the of the an discussion of how such of oppression to because of their most of the of the in account of how structural oppression the and becomes the material conditions of a all its social to be in its The that in thus and a by what is to life to a by what is there are they are to that the is to should should to in and is no something but a of the and of what has I understanding the of oppression as one's and that are in to an inhibition of self-development way of that is by the exercise and development of one's capacities in the of with the inhibition of in can in of for of that are in the from a to the Since people their in the conditions they the can with the of by the to the the in one's the of one's self-development. In such for the group, the conditions of the of the of life are set in such a way that the of and the of along the way a of their self-determination and is, because of the and of social structures of oppression and their on the on the of the and and The in such as will to and to of can in or a relation to which from the of the of the to a of of in the of one's human capacities and a of one's conditions as can in a of and with that in the with a to structural and Wolff and can be a of form of engagement to unjust in processes and or a of an to from or that the of the can as an of a all of participation to within conditions of structural or a that from the of in and can be the to a in and a in a in (Young is, to of the of one's by an inhibition of one's self-development in the conditions of oppression. The and of the the of the (the way one's and of on an form of a is not to such a form of injustice to be because structures are and through The to well-being, however, is even the of the extent of injustice of us a of human I to Sangiovanni for and the development of this I to McKeown for her and for engagement with the as it to for her and I indebted to two the of the argument. by as of the The no of