Why the Social Connection Model Fails: Participation is Neither Necessary nor Sufficient for Political Responsibility

Abstract

Iris Marion Young presents a social connection model on which those, and only those, who participate in structural processes that produce injustice have a forward-looking responsibility to redress the resulting injustice by challenging the structures that produce it (she sometimes calls this a political responsibility [Young 2011]). In Young's view, this is an all-things-considered, albeit discretionary, responsibility. I argue that participation in a structural process that produces injustice is neither necessary nor sufficient for having political responsibilities, and that therefore the social connection model must be rejected. A subtler model is needed, one that depicts participation in a structural process that produces injustice as sufficient (but not necessary) for having pro tanto forward-looking responsibilities to redress the process, unless the participating agent satisfies certain excusing conditions. I suggest the intuitive force of the thought that mere participation gives us political responsibilities can be explained by more fundamental considerations. Hastily, we might conclude that all participants have political responsibilities simply because most of them satisfy at least one of the following conditions: they cause injustice to continue, they are morally responsible for injustice, they benefit from injustice, they have communal ties with the victims of injustice, or they have the capacity to redress injustice.

Forward‐Looking Responsibility and Political Corporate Social Responsibility

“…Again, while credit should be given to Young for incorporating different dimensions of power into the SCM, including the relative power held by different actors connected to structural injustice, the parameter of interest is not without some difficulties. For example, as Gunnemyr (2020, p. 580) notes,

‘workers in the global garment industry who face harassment, unemployment, and poverty if they broadcast their situation or join a union lack a forward‐looking responsibility to challenge the structural processes of the global garment industry. Because of their situation, their responsibility is disabled, silenced, or overridden’.

…”

“…In other words, victims’ circumstances may mean that they are unable to act upon their responsibility. It is worth noting that Young's insistence on victims taking responsibility is not simply underpinned by the idea that less powerful agents should exert pressure on more powerful agents in order to address structural injustice, but that victims have an ‘epistemic advantage’ with regard to their own situation and the solutions that may be required (Gunnemyr, 2020, p. 577). That is, victims ‘know the most about the harms they suffer’, and, without their input, ‘well‐meaning outsiders may inadvertently harm them in a different way’ (Young, 2011, p. 146).…”

Artificial Intelligence in a Structurally Unjust Society

“…Although no individual can change the social structure independently, by working together with 11 While Young's SCM is quite influential in discussions on structural injustice, this model and the corresponding notion of political responsibility have also received many critiques. For example, see Nussbaum (2009) for critiques of Young's claim that political responsibility does not concern blame; see Gunnemyr (2020) for critiques regarding Young's idea of connections; and see Schwenkenbecher (2021) for critiques regarding the lack of specificity on shared responsibility. Lin (forthcoming) also points out some theoretical gaps of Young's theory that require further explorations.…”

De la crítica a la acción social en el arte transnacional: combatir la injusticia estructural

“…Young falleció dejando sin matizar algunas cuestiones que han sido analizadas en publicaciones posteriores por defensoras y detractores. Gunnemyr (2020) no es el primero ni el único en objetar que los escritos de Young difuminan la diferencia entre la responsabilidad moral y la responsabilidad política. McKeown (2021) redacta una exhaustiva revisión de literatura sobre la injusticia estructural, y desarrolla su propio cuerpo teórico tomando la noción de poder como factor clave.…”