Caroline EyPOL 304Professor ShawReview 8/35/14I. As one interpretation of the second principle of justice as fairness, Rawls argues that "democratic equality" is the best way for citizens to realize their life plans, as the meeting of the difference principle with a fair equality of opportunity. The second principle states that "social and economic inequalities should be organized so that they are both (a) reasonably expected to be to the advantage of all, and (b) attached to open positions and functions to all” (Rawls, 53). With an unequal distribution of situations, the aim of society “is not to establish and secure the most attractive prospects for the better off, unless this benefits the less fortunate” (Rawls, 65). The principles of justice are in place to ensure that the “assignment of rights and duties” throughout the basic structure of society fairly distributes both the “benefits and burdens” of social and economic benefits (Rawls, 47 ). Building on the difference principle, wealth and income inequality can be justified if all parties benefit. In comparison to alternative interpretations of natural liberty and liberal equality, a system of democratic equality holds to "pure procedural justice...[even though] this still leaves too much room for social and natural contingency » (Rawls, 69). However, given this notion, the difference principle is fully “compatible with the efficiency principle” (Rawls, 69). By associating the difference principle with fair equality of opportunity, it ensures that even though individuals may be in radically different situations, the situations themselves are justified as long as the structure serves to “improve the expectations of the less advantaged.” .. middle of paper ... should be in Nozick's framework (Rawls, 76). For Rawls, the goal of society is to minimize disagreement and generate a cooperative social order that benefits the poor. He goes on to argue that, under Nozick, this would force individuals to join corporations, making the situation unfair to individuals. For Rawl, the Nozickian framework is naive, happily assuming that individuals will be inclined to coexist peacefully if they are given the opportunity to pursue their own life plans. Nozick's arguments in this statement are much more convincing, as they give individuals the freedom to use their natural resources. endowments for their own benefit without complicating them with the need to help the most deprived in society. Beyond Rawl's principle of redistribution towards the most deprived, there is no principle other than taking into account the situation of disadvantaged individuals...