Martha Minow Making All The Difference Summary

PART A: Martha Minow’s Five Unstated Assumptions About The Dilemma of Difference

In Making All the Difference: Inclusion and Exclusion in American Law, Martha Minow outlines five unstated assumptions about the dilemma of difference and special privilege. The dilemma of difference is based on the idea that the identity of recognizing differences threatens the idea that we are all the same. In other words, the idea that everyone is the same leads to formal equality. The dilemma of difference is also about the “unstated point of reference,” which is when there is a failure to recognize difference as a problem. For example, Mari Matsuda’s experience of not being allowed into the store illustrates how it is problematic to recognize difference

It is difficult to recognize race discrimination because society masks it with the notion that everyone is equal, even when that is not the case. Mary Cornish proposes substantive equality as opposed to formal equality. The “substantive equality approach questions whether the same treatment in practice produces equal or unequal results. Substantive equality requires taking into account the underlying differences between individuals in society and accommodating those differences in order to ensure equality of impact and outcome.” Iris Marion Young suggests that there is a need to change the status quo and proposes that we need social welfare programs that address the problem of discrimination. Those who oppose status quo are perceived negatively by

Michael Ignatieff identifies that the role of human rights is to enable groups to have dignity and rights that will allow them to act “politically to improve their lives.” Ignatieff provides that it is important to know our history to understand systematic equality. According to Ignatieff, the language of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights provides protection and empowerment to vulnerable people. For instance, section 7 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights provides that everyone should be treated equally without being discriminated against. Despite this legal constraint, it does not restrain people from being racist. David Henrik wrote about democratic racism and provided that we support the Charter because of our belief that we are racist. His argument is that groups encourage them even though systematically we are okay with racism.

As Patricia William points out, human rights are complex as it is not always black and white. William acknowledges in her response that Mari Matsuda used the metaphor of the quail’s call to illustrate how human rights is not always “attractive.” In short, human rights can at times be brutish, nasty and messy. This is especially true when human rights law deals with the issue of racism. Barb Thomas acknowledges that there are underlying issues that need to be