Essay Sample on Distribution of Membership and Health Care

Introduction

According to Walzer, membership, and access to health care in a particular community is based on two key factors: being born in the community or joining the community through frontier as controlled by established policies (Walzer, p.40-42). These controls do not conform to Walzer's sphere of justice as he elucidates that egalitarians share a conception of inequality through monopolistic control of the dominant good. The latter means that individuals with access to familial reputation, landed wealth, religious or political office, technical knowledge or capital have higher chances of acquiring membership in the US than those lacking. Walzer opposes dominance and suggests that a monopoly should not hold different social goods and no particular good should be generally convertible to limit multiplication of inequalities through the conversion process. He also emphasizes that our understanding of what social good is, its attached values and to who influences how and when it should be distributed. Distributive justice in the society is guided by both self-determination and shared values that align a person's actions; however, individual perceptions demanding equal treatment limits the complete application of distributive justice in all aspects of the society.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Membership

Concerning membership distributions, Walzer's views assert that states have the moral jurisdiction to either admit or refuse foreigners without the constraints of principles of justice (Walzer, p.220). However, the immigration policy should be constrained in a manner that it adheres to the concept of shared justice by members of a particular political community. Furthermore, the admission needs to comply with the principles of shared aid such that the members admitted do not cause harm to the existing members. Walzer asserts that citizenship should be open to all residents especially in states where most are people are considered full citizens. For example, if guest workers are admitted and denied membership status, then they are condemned to becoming "metics" by living in more impoverished conditions and being excluded and paid lower wages (Walzer, pp.58-61). The latter results in pilling of inequalities resulting in dominance which is redistributed among other spheres in the society. Therefore, Walzer champions for distributive justice where all communities whether they are the majority or minority can accommodate themselves to each other.

However, also having mobility and unrestricted immigration as a defining factor is a threat to the values that are considered a guide to membership admission. Individuals with the monopoly to join neighborhoods they see fit will make the political communities disintegrate in the long run. People will come and go as they will making communities to be composed of mobile strangers with a limited sense of community or motivation to act for the good of the political community. Therefore, patriotism is highly correlated with having shared meaning and appreciation of the communities individuals belong to. However, with increasing globalization closing the border of a favored nation such as the US is likely to result in more severe consequences such as immigration becoming a lucrative business to cartels, reduced community cohesion, and increased poverty levels.

Also, membership is critical in establishing the foundation of distribution in Walzer's spheres of justice. The negative formula of justice which strives to abolish dominance creates a framework that is capable of restricting the narrow-minded path of tradition. The latter is possible as the regime of complex equality provides signals that are vital in determining whether boundaries among various spheres have been transgressed and dominance is manifesting. Equality can always be exported to other spheres without sparking negative consequences. Therefore, it is only vital that the membership guides such level of equality. Also, management of the spheres is guided by the fact that no citizen in one sphere or having a particular social good can be weakened in another sphere or having another good (Walzer, p.19). Such an account can be interpreted that the lack of money does not inhibit one from acquiring respect or love. The prohibition indicates how such adjustments should be made within a particular community. The existing political community is therefore guided by the politics of the past and is used to determine the future.

As the approach takes recourse in understanding the past and affecting the decisions made for the future, circularity is necessitated. If we want as a nation to maintain the honor, respect and any other values that cannot be with money, then complex equality is vital. With complex equality, the society can function optimally with people excelling where their aptitude is highest without restrictions. Shared social justice is essential in creating safe and accommodative communities as there are lots of people living and working in the US without having full citizenships. The latter complies with Walzer's account that individuals living in a nation should be made citizens or not be given the admission. Considering most immigrants are already residing in the US and are in one way or another contributing to the economy, then full citizenship is the viable option. Having full citizenship also means improved equality as they conform to the beliefs and practices of communities within which they reside. Prop 187 advocating for the denial of citizenship to undocumented immigrants became a representation of the California Republican Party turning the party as an identity of white supremacists (Yglesias, p.1). California's republic governor Wilson never won a state-wide election after championing for Prop 187. The latter shows that Americans care about the individuals living among them whether they are citizens or non-citizens and the discrimination of undocumented immigrants results in alienation by the society as a whole. The past, current and future US presidential elections are thus driven by arguments on what to do with such class of people.

Membership to a given political community is a social unit that guarantees how critical choices made regarding the equal distribution of goods. In a way, the particular social group becomes a constraint to egalitarianism. Having membership as a political unit also provokes relativism which inspires the emergence of instances of justice through equivalence of status. Justice as a result of membership acquisition through similar characteristics can be well understood through the hermeneutic circle. Philosopher Giambattista Vico in his book On the Most Ancient Wisdom of the Italians distinguishes two key factors what is true (verum) and what is made (factum). Vico identifies social knowledge as plastic (Vico, p.16). Relating this to the hermeneutics of knowledge cultures are seen something created and understood by humans. Having an own notion of justice makes it easy for people to connect to and implement rather than oppose. Therefore, justice is inherently buried in every culture's understanding. And since culture plays the central role in determining the membership of individual conflicts are easily resolved among the various spheres. However, the observation by Vico implies that the society knows the certain cultural forms if they actively participated in its creation. Walzer, on the other hand, means that it is vital for an individual to understand the explicit and implicit notion of equality and justice for its realization (Walzer, p.14). Therefore, employing membership as the guide to the distribution of social goods is consistent as an initial parameter of justice that is understood and accepted by the society is executed.

Health Care

Complex equality is built on the pluralism principles that guide the distribution of social goods. Every sphere reflects a particular principle, and no principle cannot provide a coherent basis for general distribution. For example, access to health care is governed by the principle of need rather than creditworthiness. The importance and role played by considering the values created by social goods are realized through the distributive principles. Walzer's claim that "we are culture producing creatures highly correlates with access to health care" (Walzer, p.314). People do not create meaning to health care; however, individuals are born and integrated into the healing systems established by the communities. Health care is, therefore, a measure of community good and is dependent on the existing relations within neighborhoods, local communities, and families (Galarneau, p.38). These relations are also the primary reason for the creation and attachment of meaning to health care regarding negotiations, settings and receiving of treatment.

Despite the close relations between health care and Walzer's concept of justice, it is impractical to implement such a system to guide access to health care. Walzer argues that justice requires for implementation of egalitarian distribution based on the value assigned to medical care, the meaning of medical care by a particular community and the overall decision to provide medication out of public resources to members belonging to a specific political community (Walzer, pp. 86-91). Ruling out the fact that state intervention is critical for the poor to access medical care in the contemporary world is impossible. Providing free care to those who cannot afford as others are charged to establish equity is unjustified. Who will determine the deserving? The past decisions made cannot also be the guide for the future as their justification may fit particular scenarios and but not be correct in all. And if applied in the distribution and access to care, then that is not justice, but its abstract. Therefore, despite access to social goods being distorted by the powerful and wealthy elite's moral philosophy to alter it completely but only to explain and critique existing practices. Also, to establish Walzer's equity, the health sector will require to all individuals to share places, all neighborhoods and local communities to be made of affiliative groups, the establishment of a stable local community boundary compared to other communities and establishment of the history of influencing the health status of members of the community. The possibilities of establishing such a reality with the dynamic modern society are impossible.

Walzer's theory is not useful for the US in particular as health care providers in the nation are divided based on which principles should be applied for the distribution of resources making shared conventions impossible. Many Americans disagree on the notion of medical care being accessed based on need rather than an individual's ability to pay. Taking the example of Americans-Indians where self-determination and self-governance are being used to provide medical care through the Indian Health Service (IHS), most American-Indians do not want to be part of the HIS (Rhoades,p.7). If access to medical care from shared institutions by the majority is excluded, who decides the principle to prevail in distributing care to the Americans-Indian not belonging to the HIS. The suggested alternative according to Walzer is for the community to operate as a schism forming its separate political community or abandon their Americans-Indian values and join the cultural majority. The former results in the secession of the multicultural values as the latter provokes cultural oppression of the minority by the majority. The shared meanings cannot be unanimous and limit oppression of minorities as communities are monolithically lacking plurality perception towards the shared good. Walzer's concept of a political community, therefore, is ideal for a traditional nation-state and not in a multicultural society where the mo...