The persistence of some central instances of social injustice in European democracies governed by the rule of law; despite abundant resources for durably reducing them, is poorly understood. Understanding better the nature of law as constructive interpretation may strongly motivate future applications of the rule of law to alleviating substantially the social injustice of unnecessary yet continuing destitution among many persons, particularly in affluent and resourceful Paris. However, recent critical examinations of the nature of law as constructive interpretation have uncovered a crucial problem with this otherwise cogent account. Here, I show how some eco-ethical reflection on the nature of aesthetic interpretation may suggest a way for resolving this problem with the nature of jurisprudential interpretation. If correct, a further developed version of this analysis may re-open constructively interpretive ways towards more socially effective means for applying the rule of law to help in the elimination of the persistent social injustice of widespread impoverishment in Paris and in other similarly governed major world cities.

This essay deals with two conceptions of the political; one that entails a clash of civilizations associated with a Schmittian critique of liberalism and a second which envisions the political as an emerging domain. The latter idea can be associated with the later work of John Rawls which separates the comprehensive from the political. I argue that it is this idea when reconstructed in relationship to a theory of multiple modernities that can be appropriated for an emerging notion of global justice. Hence, it is in the domain of the political that we should look for a new and emerging concept of justice.