Justice sociale, inégalités, exclusion

Abstract

Social justice, inequality, exclusion Mireille Elbaum Throughout the sixties and seventies in France, the question of ine- quality was at the very core of the social debate over the distribution of the fruits of growth. Since the beginning of the eighties, the very idea of combating inequality was however challenged and seen as inadequate, or even outmoded. New theoretical developments advanced concepts of justice which seemed to suggest a renewed consensus of opinion converging towards the notion of « equity », or which referred to complex and plural concepts of justice, born from the confrontation of diverse ways of reasoning. And the concomitant, often reductionist, re-interpretation indirectly resulted in a situation whereby the priority formerly given to the problem of inequa- lity within economic and social policies was abandoned. In this context, the attenuation of traditional disparities in income, property, and living conditions ceased in the eighties. The mechanisms guiding the reproduction of « social classifications » were hardly questio- ned, despite the upheaval which occured within professional and social structures. And the « democratisation » of education did not, in itself, have any significant effect on the « inequality of opportunities », in a context where the diploma as a criterion for entering the working world could only exacerbate expectations and frustrations vis-a-vis the school system. Above all, with the development of mass unemployment, problems of precarlousness and underemployment were thereafter presented as the main type of inequality afflicting French society. The growing awareness of the existence of « new forms of poverty », partially revealed by the « RMI » (French system of income support), contributed to challenging the global objective of combating inequality, and resulted in a more and more extensive, commonplace use of the notion of « exclusion », making the « fight against exclusion » a policy in itself, disassociated from the overall functioning of the society. Furthermore, the challenge to inequality was also set against a « necessity for economic efficiency » which, according to certain theories, called for a greater dispersion in salaries, and a system of benefits and witholdings that would not penalise increases in income. The pertinence of these theories is however questionable ; the link between social dispa- rities and economic performances has not been established, whether we consider a dispersion in salaries on the whole, the specific role of the minimum wage, or the effects of unemployment compensation and wel- fare benefits. It would appear dangerous, in France, to envisage an economic and social model based on an increase in disparities, with the risk of affecting the economy's global competitiveness, of developing poverty further and of pushing workers to opt for idleness when confronted with low wages, all in return for an only apparent decrease in unemployment. Even if new contours and new methods are needed, global policies to combat inequality must be placed at the centre of the debate once again, and considered as the major axis in reforms affecting the Welfare State, concerning the regulation of public health expenditure, the financing of social protection, tax reform, or the rehabilitation and overall transpa- rency of the mechanisms guiding collective solidarity. On the other hand, one of the main criticisms of the Welfare State concerns its difficulty to fully integrate the extent and the multiplicity of the exclusion phenomena. They were able to defend the idea that exclu- sion should become the central, if not exclusive, axis in social policies. The temptation then was to oppose the fight against exclusion and the fight against inequality, setting them off one against the other. However, today this type of concept has come up against important limitations and re-insertion policies now need to reconsider the impor- tance of an objective of social justice in its entirely to serve as a guideline for their renewal. This is particularly true in the field of education, through geographical sectorisation, the pedagogical contents of courses and the mechanisms of selection through orientation and a choice of paths. This is also true for housing, where the assistance given to tenants in « HLM » (Council Housing) and to problem neighbourhoods buckles under the incapicity of the system of State Intervention when it comes to regulating the housing offer and to restoring spatial mobility. Finally, this is true for employment policies which, trough a multiplication of massive professional insertion measures, have indirectly reinforced a model of « activity sharing », the social cost and the fragility of which call for a reappraisal.