Rawlsian Ideal Theory
What does Rawls call the device that hides information like race, gender, and class?
The veil of ignorance.
Which injustice does Rawls almost never mention in his 2,000 pages of writing?
Racial injustice.
What hidden contract does Pateman say exists beneath the social contract?
The sexual contract.
Are categories like “race” and “gender” natural or historically produced?
Historically produced by power.
University bans race-based data collection to promote “colour-blindness.” Good or bad for justice?
Bad — it hides inequality.
What kind of society does Rawls assume in ideal theory?
A society with full compliance and no past injustice.
What does Mills call Rawls’s omission of race: accidental or structural?
Structural.
According to Pateman, who is the original “contracting individual” implicitly patterned on?
A man.
Does ignoring a category (like race) dissolve the power relations behind it?
No — silence is how power hides itself.
A constitution proclaims equality but leaves family law unchanged. Whose critique does this echo?
Pateman.
Why does Rawls treat racial injustice as a “non-ideal” issue?
Because ideal theory assumes a society where injustice never entered the basic structure.
What is the difference between “prevention” and “rectification,” according to Mills?
Preventing injustice is not the same as correcting it once it has occurred.
Why does Pateman think Rawls’s abstraction hides gender domination?
Because Rawls assumes equality without analyzing patriarchy.
According to Foucault, does identity come before or after power?
Identity is the result of power
A philosopher says: “We should theorize justice as if colonialism never happened.” Whose critique applies?
Mills — ideal theory erases domination.
According to Mills, why does ideal theory make Rawls’s principles politically weak for real societies?
Because it begins from a fictional starting point without historical domination.
Why does Mills say Rawls’s society would be not just racism-free, but race-free?
Because race is socially constructed through domination; in a society without history, race wouldn’t exist.
How does Pateman argue the private/public divide protects male power?
It treats the family and reproduction as “natural,” outside political critique.
How does Foucault help explain the failure of ideal theory?
Ideal theory erases the very power relations that structure society.
A government removes the word “homosexual” from law but increases surveillance. What would Foucault say?
Eliminating the category does not eliminate power.
If Rawls starts from a world where domination never existed, can his principles ever address injustice? Why or why not?
Open discussion
Does “not seeing race” eliminate racism? What would Mills argue?
No — Mills says ignoring race strengthens its effects
Can gender equality be achieved if the family remains outside political scrutiny?
Open discussion, my thesis implies no
What would Foucault say about the idea that justice requires “not seeing race or gender”?
Open — but the answer is: that’s a technique of power.
“Justice requires abstraction.” — Rawls
“Justice requires confronting domination.” — Mills, Pateman, Foucault
Who is right, and under what conditions?
Open to discussion