Are We Asking the Right Question?

The main issue I have with this question is that it addresses states as if they are people. It is unfair if a person cannot achieve his or her potential if they are hindered by situational factors. The reasoning behind why this would be considered injustice, in my opinion, is that the ability to pursue happiness (in whatever form that may come in) is a natural right. For me, a natural right is the idea that each human being is entitled to certain privileges (for lack of a better synonym) because of the sole fact that they are human beings. Therefore, when a person is denied the right to pursuing their own happiness, whether that is found in education or clay making, because of factors they cannot control (such as discrimination), then they are suffering from an unfair situation. However, the question of “fairness” is completely different when the subject is a state because none of the above applies. The only reason I would consider something to be unfair to a state is if the people within the said state suffer.

With this rationality, it is unfair that certain states experience economic successes and economic failures as a result of the disparity in readiness for global competition. However, I would argue this is unfair because the people born into the less fortunate states suffer from the disparity because they are unable to fully compete in the global market because of situational factors (where they were born) that they could not control. It is not an issue for the state merely because what exactly is suffering for a state if a state is nothing but a theory, idea, or state of mind?

Therefore this brings up a new question. Instead of “Does a state have a right to wealth?” we should be asking, “Do the people within the state have a right to wealth?”