ABSTRACT
This chapter discusses a claim which can be expressed in the words of a now familiar slogan: the personal is political. It argues that John Rawls's wobble on this matter is not a case of mere indecision, which could readily be resolved in favor of inclusion of the family within the basic structure: that is the view of Susan Okin and she is wrong about that. The chapter shows that Rawls's inability to regard Germany as having done comparatively well with respect to the difference principle is a grave defect in his conception of the site of distributive justice. It shows that the objection is inconsistent with many statements by Rawls about the role of principles of justice in a just society. The chapter argues that the discordant statements may be dropped from the Rawlsian canon. It concludes that original criticism of Rawls rests vindicated, against the particular objection in issue.
