What is Social Justice? Why does it matter?
What does social justice mean to you?
Ask any group of people, and you’re likely to hear a wide range of answers. Some might speak about human rights, others about racial or gender equality, or poverty and the distribution of wealth. Their responses could reflect their personal values, political views, or even the headlines they saw that morning.
But if you ask how they know what’s just or unjust in society, you’ll often hear something less concrete: “It just feels wrong,” or “I know it when I see it.” This intuitive reaction, a kind of moral “sniff test”, is common, but doesn’t offer much clarity on what social justice truly means - or whether it can be clearly defined at all.
We might expect organisations like charities, NGOs, social enterprises, or public institutions to offer a clearer definition. Here too, though, the meaning of social justice often depends on each organisation’s values and goals. In Western contexts, the term is often associated with progressive or left-wing movements - the so-called ‘social justice warriors’. But it is also claimed by politically conservative organisations, like the UK’s Centre for Social Justice. It has even historically been adopted by the far-right to promote antisemitic ideologies.[i]
So where does this leave us?
Can all of these organisations rightfully claim to advance social justice?
Is the term just a rallying cry to be adopted by any cause - or does it rest on something deeper?
Can we move beyond the “sniff test” to something more substantial?
A Complex and Contested History
To explore this, we might look to scholars and thinkers who’ve spent centuries asking: what does justice in society really mean?
Although the term social justice first appeared in Western writings comparatively recently, following the Enlightenment era, the concept relates to much older traditions. [ii]
Enlightenment and Industrial Revolution era thinkers connected social justice to values like freedom, equality, fairness and reason - which continue to shape Western conceptions of the term today. [iii] But ideas about justice in society originated far earlier, with philosophical traditions from East Asia, the Islamic world, and Indigenous societies in Africa and the Americas all developing rich, distinct ideas about how to live well together.
Although they arrived at different conclusions, these traditions tended to engage with similar foundational questions which underpin modern conceptions of social justice, such as:
What are our roles, rights, and responsibilities as a collective?
How can we do right by one another and by our communities?
How do we coexist in the face of difference?
A Plurality of Visions
Across the world, communities have offered many different answers to these questions. These reflect diverse beliefs about who we are as human beings, what society looks like, who should hold power and how that power should be deployed. [iv]
Some theories see human beings as inherently moral or socially oriented, grounding social justice in shared values, tradition, or a higher moral order. Others emphasise individual autonomy and rational self-interest, arguing for impartial institutions or agreements to protect civic rights and secure cooperation.
Some focus on outcomes - such as reducing inequality or maximising collective well-being - while others stress the importance of challenging dominant power structures and providing for real freedoms beyond basic needs.
There is no single, universally accepted vision of social justice - and there may never be. With our varied cultures, experiences, and histories, we inevitably hold different ideas about how to live well together.
Agree to Disagree?
In the face of disagreement, some theorists argue that we can work with partial theories - frameworks that help identify injustice even if they don’t describe a perfect society. [v] Others go further, suggesting that social justice is entirely contextual or even purely subjective. [vi]
In our opinion, this plurality of views doesn’t mean that social justice is devoid of meaning, that we should abandon the concept altogether, or ‘agree to disagree’. Rather, it challenges us to clarify our own values and priorities - and to engage in meaningful dialogue with others to find out where common understandings can be reached.
This means being able to articulate what we believe, to listen openly to differing views, to examine the roots of our assumptions, and to reflect critically on the processes and principles that shape our shared lives.
Viewed this way, pursuing social justice is not only about striving for what’s right. It’s also about doing the difficult, often uncomfortable work of understanding ourselves - and our responsibilities - within a broader social fabric.
Towards Social Justice Evaluation
Recognising the diversity of perspectives doesn’t mean all ideas about social justice are equally valid, constructive or reflective of human experience. It does mean we need ways to reflect on and test our views and assumptions.
This is especially important for individuals and organisations, like ourselves, who seek to make a positive impact in society. We must be able to clearly express our values and priorities - and understand how our work fits within wider social systems. That requires a well-defined vision of social justice, and a willingness to critically engage with other viewpoints.
This reflective process involves:
Defining your own understanding of social justice
Clarifying your core values and goals
Examining how your actions affect broader social systems
Engaging with diverse perspectives and critiques
At Just Insights, this lies at the heart of our mission: to place social justice at the centre of decision-making. We work with purpose-driven organisations and changemakers to examine the foundations of their beliefs and actions, to articulate their values and vision, to understand and evaluate their work in its wider context. To find out more about how we do this see How We Work.
Why It Matters: Social Justice as Truth-Telling
If we want to take social justice seriously - whether as individuals, communities, or organisations - we need to move beyond vague intuitions and political slogans. That starts with being clear about our assumptions, listening to others, and engaging in honest evaluation.
Only then can we move from disagreement toward shared understanding - and from intention to meaningful change.
As academic and cultural theorist bell hooks once said, “The heart of justice is truth-telling.” [vii] At a time where we are increasingly sold the message that we are in a “post-truth” society, placing a spotlight on social justice, listening to each other’s truths, and seeking clarity in our values is essential if we hope to build a better future for ourselves, our communities, and our planet.
Posted By Ruth Wainwright
[i] Social Justice was an anti semitic political periodical published by the American Reverend Charles Coughlin from 1936 to 1942. See articles in Time and The New York Times.
[ii] The earliest documented usage of the term ‘social justice’ in the West has generally been traced to 1840, in the writings of a Jesuit advisor to the Vatican, Luigi Taparelli d’Azegli.
[iii] See, for example, The Information Architects of Encyclopaedia Britannica. "social justice". Encyclopedia Britannica, 6 Aug. 2025.
[iv] Visit our Resource Centre to explore summaries of some of theories about social justice that have been put forward in different communities.
[v] See, for example, Sen, Amartya. The Idea of Justice. Harvard University Press, 2009.
[vi] See, for example, Miller, D. (2002). Two Ways to Think About Justice. Politics, Philosophy & Economics, 1(1), 5-28.
[vii] hooks, bell. All About Love: New Visions. HarperCollins, 2001.
