630
PARTISAN REVIEW
citizen is as worthy as every other citizen; but it cannot dictate a par–
ticular conception of the good life (moral, esthetic, cognitive, or
material) for exactly the same reason: its minions are no better than
anyone else.
Scarcity is the unavoidable agony of liberalism: there are never
enough resources to achieve justice. Even if all resources were used
for equalizing power, there would not be enough; and this would
negate the whole point of power in the first place. What is that
point? Here we come to what I infer is the bedrock of liberalism, on
which Ackerman, Rawls, Nozick, and Friedman, and other liberals
stand together-despite Ackerman's disagreement with the others
on various scores. Power, for liberals, is a means for individuals to
pursue what they each conceive to be "the good." The only collec–
tive purpose is to equalize power so that all have the same opportu–
nity for pursuit. (Ackerman's index contains eighteen entries under
"rights" and another half-dozen under "natural rights," but the
words
duty
and
obligation
do not appear.)
Since all resources cannot be devoted to justice, a decision must
be made as to what proportion should be. It is an agonizing deci–
sion. Suppose it is settled somehow. Call the proportion devoted to
justice"B," for" structural budget," and the proportion reserved
for individuals to do with as they like "S," for "self-regarding."
(These are Ackerman's terms.) This raises another agonizing ques–
tion: How do you allocate B among all the unfairnesses that exist,
given that B is not remotely large enough to remedy all of them?
Political theory is made up of such unresolved questions.
Ackerman's only consolation is that "no form of practical politics
can pretend that is offers the final solution to the liberal tension
between freedom and social justice."
Ackerman covers many other issues, such as abortion (allowa–
ble), intergenerational trusteeship (mandatory), genetic planning
(taboo-gives parents unwarranted power over their children);
parental determination of their children's education (taboo, for the
same reason), tragedy (central to the liberal conception of justice),
happiness (can't be guaranteed), infanticide (no good- someone
might want to adopt the ch ild), the preservation of the Grand
Canyon (up to the majority), and sexual li cense (part of absolute
freedom). The book is full of surprises and, at times, of enter–
taining prose.
HARRY C. BREDEMEIER
