Abstract

The thesis investigates the political philosophy of justice for Maori in New Zealand. The recent communitarian critique of liberalism undermines a normative approach to the investigation. Therefore, the critique, as it is presented by Michael Sandel and Alasdair MacIntyre and the liberal reply, as represented by John Rawls and Brian Barry, is explicated in Chapter One and a new normative approach to justice is outlined. This new approach is, in the main, the result of Brian Barry's three theorems of justice: justice as mutual advantage, as reciprocity, and as impartiality. The resulting sketch of the conditions of justice is then applied to five major New Zealand writers on justice for Maori. The five writers are examined first for their coherency of political argument, and second for the theories of justice at work in the texts. Then, with the help of the critiques explicated in chapter one, the writer's theories of justice are judged as to their ability to meet the conditions of a just agreement. The conclusions to be drawn from the thesis are twofold. First, a new liberal approach is possible to defend against the communitarian claims. Second, the New Zealand writers use theories of justice which are likely to produce agreements that are unstable, and need, therefore, coercive enforcement agencies to keep them in place.