Caroline EyPOL 304Professor ShawReview 8/35/14I. As one of the interpretations of the second principle of justice as fairness, Rawls argues that “democratic equality” is the best way for citizens to realize their life projects, since it meets the difference principle with fair equality of opportunity. The second principle states that “social and economic inequalities must be organized so that they are (a) reasonably foreseeable to the benefit of all, and (b) linked to positions and tasks open to all” (Rawls, 53). With an unequal distribution of situations, the purpose of society “is not to establish and secure more attractive prospects for those who are better off, unless this benefits those who are less fortunate” (Rawls, 65). Principles of justice are in place to ensure that “the assignment of rights and duties” across the basic structure of society justly distributes both the “benefits and burdens” of social and economic advantages (Rawls, 47). Based on the difference principle, inequalities in wealth and income can be justified if all parties benefit. Compared to alternative interpretations of natural liberty and liberal equality, a system of democratic equality holds to “pure procedural justice…[though] this still leaves too much to social and natural contingency” (Rawls, 69). Given this notion, however, the difference principle is fully “compatible with the efficiency principle” (Rawls, 69). When you connect the difference principle with fair equality of opportunity, you ensure that while individuals may find themselves in drastically different situations, the situations themselves are justified as long as the structure serves to “enhance the expectations of the least advantaged… paper ......could fit into Nozick's framework (Rawls, 76). For Rawls, the purpose of society is to minimize disagreement and generate a cooperative social order that benefits the less well-off. He continues to argue that, according to Nozick's framework, this would force individuals to join societies, making it unfair to individuals. For Rawl the Nozickian framework is naïve, as it blissfully assumes that individuals will be inclined to coexist peacefully if given the opportunity to pursue their own life projects. grants for their own benefit without complicating them with the need to help the most disadvantaged in society. Beyond Rawl's principle of redistribution towards the less well-off, there is no other principle other than addressing the plight of oppressed individuals.