Marx's Concept of Justice: Disambiguating Capitalist and Communist Justice

Karl Marx is back. No less than three academic monographs by philosophers treating Marx's ethical, social, and political thought were published by top presses in 2024 alone (cf. Edwards and Leiter 2024; Leipold 2024; Wills 2024). This is startling evidence of a renewed interest by philosophers in what Marx has to offer to ethics and social philosophy. Although an earlier flowering of interest by analytic philosophers—arguably beginning some 50 years ago with a debate between Allen Wood and Ziyad Husami (cf. Cohen et al. 1980)—generated an enormous literature on Marx and justice, my contention here is that we can uncover a heretofore insufficiently scrutinized concept of justice in the works of Marx precisely by returning to that inaugural debate. We can do this by triangulating the positions of Wood and Husami, showing how their views, when taken together, imply a third position that is more textually faithful and constitutes a more compelling interpretation than either of Marx's concept of justice. This procedure is appropriate and worthwhile because Wood's position continues to loom large in the contemporary literature. Whether taken as a starting point for understanding Marx on justice (Wolff and Leopold 2025), as a foil for an opposing view (Wills 2024, 156–160), or as an influential ancestor (cf. Edwards and Leiter 2024, 115–116 and 145 n28), his interpretation often frames the discussion of Marxian justice. Each of these claims has been defended before. For instance, DiQuattro (1998) and Shoikhedbrod (2019, 74–88) have defended (1), whereas (2) is a well-known component of Marx's historical materialism (even if its import for the debate about Marx and justice has largely been missed by many analytic commentators). A version of (3), too, has recently been suggested by Kain (2023, 102–103). What makes my position distinctive, though, is that it combines these claims into a clearer and more systematic whole in order to furnish a novel interpretation of Marx's concept of justice. Like Husami, I focus specifically on Marx's conception of distributive justice—that is, justice as fairness, or a fair distribution (but where what is to be distributed crucially involves both “the material conditions of production” and, derivatively, the “means of consumption” Marx takes as following from the former) (CW 24, 88, 1975).1 Accordingly, I think it is legitimate and even dialogically productive to say that Marx can agree with Rawls, that “the principles of distributive justice are the principles of social justice: they provide a way of assigning rights and duties in the basic institutions of society and they define the appropriate distribution of the benefits and burdens of social cooperation” (Rawls 1971, 4)—but only as long as it is remembered that for Marx, these principles are always relative to and vary on the basis of the mode of production to which they correspond. I take my interpretation of Marx on justice to have the following virtues: (1) it does away with the need for the awkward distinction between moral and non-moral goods which Wood imputes to Marx (Wood 2004, 128–132; Wood 1980b, 121–134); (2) it does away with the need for the counterintuitive and uncharitable (to Marx) view, shared by Cohen, Elster, Geras, and later, Wolff and Leopold, that “Marx did think capitalism was unjust but he did not think he thought so” (Geras 1984, 60; cf. Cohen 1983, 444; Elster 1983; Wolff and Leopold 2025); (3) it does away with the need to posit a break or change in moral perspective between the early (1843) and the later Marx and Engels, as Wood does to account for the clearly moral perspective of some early passages (Wood 2004, 281; Wood 1980b, 127); (4) lastly, it does away with the need for the similarly counterintuitive view of Edwards and Leiter that Marx's clearly moral perspective in some passages of his mature work should be interpreted in non-cognitivist terms (Edwards and Leiter 2024, 116).2 The first important claim of my interpretation is that there are two conceptions or of justice in Marx's on capitalism in his more justice and or justice. This is what for the passages in and where Marx claims that capitalism and the and that it are to this and these in moral The debate between Wood and Husami precisely on this Wood to passages where Marx capitalism and its and are Husami the passages where Marx the of by as and and Wood the in the Husami his and to have his Husami that the the he what is not his or he what to the there is in which the can the and Wood's is that Marx clearly does not this in the on Marx that he the the but the that on his the with the of or in of is not which Marx as an to are or a of their What I is that both these are for the that they do not the concept of justice in Marx into its and Husami, there is a for Marx in which the can the and a to the of and for the on a the of to the of that the is to the of justice. this justice is which is Marx it as and This is the of view, but he it in a way that Marx's and that important of interpretation of Marx's about and justice is its of the he about the justice or of in to these and his justice in the of or The is for a and the the he has in with his of to he to this to by the of political there is in this the as Marx with to what Marx takes the of this of the to the to this mode of production” is, the with Wood does not think this is a for his Marx, of justice on to the mode of production can be some of or (Wood 2004, is, there can be only legitimate conception or of justice that can be some of in a mode of only the of justice can be or to the mode of production for I that there is in evidence to Wood's are passages he does not take into and there are passages that he their this my and third that for Marx the mode of production the and that the of justice can be I both Wood and Husami in to be a of Marx's into the more to my it be to to some to my first claim that Marx is with and even between and conceptions of on the he capitalism to be and and on the to be in its some have that for Marx capitalism only and it is to to the view that capitalism is in (cf. Kain whereas have the claim that Marx thought be in it be justice (cf. and justice is to be The of and the when by as the of does not be both to and by a in for his The with his and and is into the and, if he in large where the on he is in the of We the of the of the and of into the of or into the and of the of justice by both the and the the of the mode of about the of have as their basis the of which makes the and to the the of that The where I my its that the distinction to that Marx capitalism was in is how my view when it to of passages from Marx's on that are to the debate between Wood and to with the these passages for their Kain makes a to into the in I his to “the from the on where Marx that the between and was both a and in with that this with the of and that it is in when Marx in his on that if only were in the of the as he the the of his have as to this mode of to (CW 24, his point production involves or justice involves point is not that or justice is only or justice the of but that it involves the that is, the claim that Marx thought be in I the of and shared two of on the they claim that Marx about justice as and and on the that he as and that this “the away of “Marx that the mode of production the of and that principles of distributive justice be take the the with this claim is that provide evidence for is that in of the Marx as productive and, I think we can less social but he that there be appropriate of distributive justice (CW 24, the his of the to his to to his (CW 24, that his of to be of distributive justice. that is, the in of Marx that can be concept of and he is his to claim that “the should not be taken is to claim that “Marx is not the as a of distributive justice, but a of the way in be in is there in the passages that Marx is but that he the as on the his of and its of he makes the that can be than the of society and its which this (CW 24, clearly that the is to be as the of and justice appropriate to “the of the mode of of that the mode to their of that Marx about justice as and the evidence is The where Marx to that of in of and to of the thought that even political is to be into about of as of about in a of does not Marx is the to or political into or conceptions of justice, which is the of his of conceptions in a of of about conceptions of justice from material in of production for Marx, The can be to of Marx's in of the of the about and as and and (CW 24, Although I this in the where I Wood's of this in Marx's point is that taken as moral from the of production they be and that can be and as (CW 24, to their for Marx way to the of and and the of the goods is the of the for to and the from a of that some to their only the of the of the have an in which the of is the for the of justice the to in a of social This of which can be only the of Marx to the of Marx as a which has its basis in the of the for it in historical it is to in of this of the for Marx's of the social in terms of the to which they this Marx is to of he to the of which is what to claim that society is a historical and that the society be a of society than to the of I for Marx, the of the for of the social is and by its in of I to by in my constitutes for the view I but that has if been as the it does for the debate about Marx and justice. the of which is the only of the of Marx was to to his to the first with the claim that “the society is but an of and in a of This is, of of the of of Marx's work and the starting point of historical of Marx's in is the the mode of production is a or mode of to that this is not that there have been and to be of production and, that there is mode of production in the of the mode of Marx his with of the mode of production that he the mode of production as to a Marx that the of the mode of production in their The that this is important to my with Wood is that he to this of Marx's of capitalism as a mode of Wood as if the mode of production for Marx is a to which only or conception of justice can be or my contention is that of Marx's is that there are two of production from or in the the is the the is for a an of with the of production in and their many of in as The of is a social of this as of production and is by the of the as of This be The way this is vary with the of social or production and the of social by the We but only for the of a with the production of that the of in the of is by his in that a in with a social the between the of and the of the the as a of the taken by in the and of his in the of the for The social of the both their and the of their are here in their in production as as in as the mode of production on its the of and the of the and of production into and of production takes on a What is to be is the a large of This is the of the of production the of always many in with this or this of many by a take on an as the of the of the the of the of the the of the of into in which they can only be in the of of production by their as the of production of the of in the of the and, with the of the of the with the in the of and the of this of the of and but with this there the of the a in and and by the of the of The of a the mode of production which has and The of the of production and the of a point which they with their This is The of The are The mode of which from the mode of This is the first of as on the of its production with the of a its This is the of the does not but it does on the basis of the of the and the in of the and the of production by The of on the of the into is an more and than the of which in on the on of production by into social the it was a of the of the of the by a but in this we have the of a by the of the my What these two passages from is that Marx is not and capitalism to the moral of the mode of he is it to the moral of an mode of production by and the mode of production with this of the of production in Marx by how that is by the and is not some The in is to the to the in the is to that the moral or of justice of the mode of production can be or to the mode of the that it is as the of the mode of production have taken the mode of production is in This that there is a in which these conceptions of justice are or as a of the between the and of production to which they correspond. to Marx's view, to the that capitalism more and more unjust to more and more of the of a this is an that as a mode of production it is and a mode of to which this of justice or is it is which Marx is whole is to capitalism from the perspective of the and the they This for he both and it is to be as it the mode of production to but the more it does the more it and The by the the first of the of a even they in in their the of the and the between and is even if first only in the that the in their they the of production to their a of of the material of and of the social of production to a mode of production and is of the as as should be as from the mode of production to the that in the the is in a and in the in a cf. and in with there is a not which the mode of distribution of the that institutions in social which in the production of and be as of an mode of the mode be and goods there is a in which is the of the that the social to the as their because they are the to as is in for it is an of to to the of the of the does not to the have we that is that not to be that has to do with We are that this is in to of Marx, his but the of the mode of production which is to an he only that of which is a what in terms be the be from the point of view of moral an to be as it did in the of and that is that the has its that have their to which the has and a be the (CW the of Marx's in I The of justice, Marx's of political to be an and in from to on the mode of and Marx this moral from a mode of production that it as a basis for Marx to as “the of the mode of production which is to an that is, that capitalism as a mode of production is and a mode of the of which have taken is from is that the of justice that capitalism and its of the of to be unjust the be from the point of view of the point of view of of the of justice that capitalism and its of the to be unjust to “the mode of production which has and of have their to which the mode of production with its of the has and and this of justice or which that capitalism is is to and in the of the mode of production and the of the the is to Wood's claims about this (1) Marx and the point of view to which capitalism is the that there is a of justice which to and is legitimate from the of the mode of (2) capitalism is has to do with Marx's of he was to a the of the social of for the of justice he and shared with and The of justice is both the starting point and the point of Marx's of is that to Marx, of justice on to the mode of production can be some of (Wood 2004, my interpretation the of Marx's of capitalism is precisely his that or of justice, or the or that capitalism is is but that it be some of as to the more in the mode of Marx that this is to be in an that both and the of a mode of the of which can be in the of the of production and the of and “the of the a in and and by the of the of A fair for a fair what is a fair and what is a fair are they by the which society and For an to this we not to the of or of and to of justice, or even What is what is even fair in be from or is by which with the material of production and the of political (CW 24, the a for a be for and by (CW 24, a for the and Marx's that with the mode of are more and more or in the of the mode of production and its which are to take their “the of society more and more to to production into which be by what the do the the of the can and do it (CW 24, Engels, the the of a (CW 24, Wood does not a of the discussion of a for a fair but he claims that “Marx and fair for a fair because in his view the was what these were we can how a does not the to their that they are a of which is with the of of the that there can be of away with the mode of is more we need to which is both to Wood's and my Marx's of the say that in what I think Marx in his about or I not that Marx was to the as as he Marx's be and or they be and The point is that I an of what Marx when he the not that he was to do in the way that he it to that with a of some of the can be as precisely what Marx for to the between Marx's and of the only if Marx, the of his to these and he about to what he as What is as Wood not the that distribution is is it in the only distribution on the basis of the mode of by or do on the from not the the about (CW 24, (Wood does not the of this I Marx's with the way the is is that it is in its of his is that the is that I not he was to the in the way he only that my makes than Wood's as an of what Marx that it can be the by the to that it in does not the and the mode of For instance, to the that is the of Marx that is the of and that have for to precisely from the that is by it that the than his in conditions of society and be the of have the of the material conditions of (CW 24, it is not that Marx that is of the two of but that if it is that it is the only of this can be to the is the only of the and have their and the with but their can do the the is the and their the of and the of the be to their position in the of production by but only by that is, and of production from the Marx's on the claim that “the of with to of (CW 24, this Marx this has been of by the of the of society the claims of the and that to it is the social for the of the social the claims of the of for the of are the of he that can be and as (CW 24, it is that the of the and to imply that or what to the “the of in order to and that they do not the of For later they on to claim that the of are the of the and that “the of the of the of to the of (CW 24, This is I the of my discussion of Marx's that his be and or they be and they are and in the a of these of the that it are of the Marx Marx's are and he how to be interpreted to the of the Marx, it is that be as in as as to the for that the of For the the were not that the distribution is or that it be to is that distribution should be to a conception of justice. Marx is about what he to be when he his with what the he is not which is to the for a if interpretation of Marx is it is to what Marx have the for a For as Husami this is precisely Marx's I there the what did Marx by his of as of the for a We can that the is The import of the first is a that should be to analytic define what do by Marx that this is important because there are the have their of justice, the have (cf. the from where Marx to the of justice by both the and the The two imply what I have that for Marx the of distribution is on the basis of the mode of that is, it to the of justice. the mode of there can be of distribution and of justice Marx that the mode of production and its of distribution to conceptions of what constitutes a this is are not by but the from to the mode of production and it with a can the of distribution and its conception of justice be in Wood by that this makes Marx's the of the agree with that the mode of production be with a as I Marx's are not of the but of he their which are to and as by the of the his point is that if by a the a distribution that is on the basis of the mode of that is, the of justice in the of they say and what this of this is precisely what Marx on to do in his where he the of the mode of production in two to which two of distribution and two conceptions of justice. The first is the of not as it has on its but on the as it from which is in and with the of the society from it (CW 24, The of distribution in this is by on a basis the in the of of and in the of social benefits as a for to and an of productive of social which the of the if a either more or less than what the of they on a that be unjust on the basis of the first of the mode of production (CW 24, even first justice as from the of the of for it the and productive of the as (CW 24, is, because of their are more productive and can work and more of than as Marx in this first only as (CW 24, than as with and that what they can as to a have and that from the What makes these from the perspective of the of is the that in this more mode of production (CW 24, that a an to benefits to as than as a mode of production the of to his to to his as the is in have justice. Wood claims that “Marx the mode of distribution of society in order to the point that the by the are and Wood's is that Marx this for the to the and did not to a conception of justice on a mode of from the of which justice as that the of the first of the mode of its of and its conception of justice in is to the of Marx the of the first of which from This in on Marx's it is for the of the of the or to from on the is a he takes and that a in his and of as I is not some as a of the for a as Wood the on the have taken this into it what there and it The are the is this alone which has it for Marx and not to from a as long as as as the to into that we are in about (CW the the should be The of is basic which the of is of rights for I rights and duties of duties are for a important to the rights and do away with their specifically (CW The justice of between of production in the that these from the of production as their The in which these as of the as the of their and as that can be on the by the of the are that this The is long as it to the mode of production and is to is unjust as as it on the basis of the mode of is is on the of the productive of have the first of the of have to its have to from the of and to the of the the of their to and be into as many of their (CW we can that both Wood and Husami are Wood is that for Marx, what is is what to or has its basis in a mode of this that there are or conceptions of justice, as justice and justice, which to of This contention that there is a in which Marx thought capitalism was but it Wood's contention that he thought it was Marx's was to the and the mode of but he to capitalism in moral to capitalism as a mode of production on its and in the provide a Wood for the that capitalism was and I to the two for their and which have the I to the for this a and a in a my to and it to this the the of the of the and the of and This work was by the and of The of