Abstract

This paper argues, first, that an egalitarianism worth its salt must affirm that many states of inequality are unjust, and hence bad in themselves, because those who are worse off do not deserve to be worse off, nor are entitled only to less, nor have voluntarily chosen to be worse off. Secondly, it contends that the intrinsic goodness of a state of just equality does not consist in there being anything positively good about it, but merely in the absence of the bad feature of injustice. Finally, it claims that a state of unjust inequality is worse than another in respect of inequality (i) the greater the number of those worse off than the average and/or (ii) the more each of them can claim, or needs to have, from the better‐off in order for them to be on the average level.