Against Impartiality

People often identify justice with impartiality. This reflects reality: many who experience injustice complain of biased treatment. But whether bias is objectionable depends on a prior commitment to an ideal of nondomination. I advance this claim by reference to impartiality arguments defended by Brian Barry and Amartya Sen. Then I sketch a historical account of impartialist ventures that shows why they once appealed but are such a tough sell today. Instead of hunting for the right defense of impartiality, political theorists would do better to focus on ways to identify and mitigate domination. Barry’s earlier work on majority rule buttresses my contention that would-be impartialists are wrongheaded to argue for independent institutions, typically courts, that are geared to shielding the dictates of justice from politics. In politics, as in life, there are no guarantees, but majoritarian democracy is a better bet for minimizing domination than any of the going alternatives.