Assessment 4 - 226675
Tuesday, 20 January 2026, 3:09 PM
Number of replies: 66
226675
ASSESSMENT 04:
FAIR'S FAIR
So, in assessment 2, we reflected on a particular case involving great wealth - Patrice Motsepe being
worth US$ 4.2 billion.
In assessment 3, we reflected on very severe poverty in South Africa where Motsepe comes from.
In this assessment we are going to think about the possibility that these two issues - great wealth and great
poverty - might be linked. Or as we said in one of the assignment 1 questions: “The wealth of a few
depends on the poverty of many.”
IS THIS OK? - Motsepe's wealth and high levels of poverty.
And this is what we are going to discuss in this assessment!
INSTRUCTIONS:
Step 0: Do assessment 1
If you haven't already done it, please go to the AT A CROSSROAD section and do Assessment 1 now.
YOU MAY GET 0 (ZERO) FOR THIS ASSESSMENT IF YOU HAVE NOT SUBMITTED
YOUR ASSESSMENT 1.
Step 1: Answer the question "Is this ok?" - COUNTS 60% OF MARKS
, Assessment 4: Fair’s Fair
1. An analysis of the inequalities described using ALL of John Rawls’ principles
in their correct order.
To judge whether it is okay for Patrice Motsepe to be so wealthy while many
mineworkers live in poverty, I will use John Rawls’ three principles in the order he said
they must be applied.
Principle 1: Greatest Equal Liberty.
Rawls said that every person must have equal basic rights, such as freedom of speech
and the right to be safe (Rawls, 1971, p. 60, cited in SUS1501 Study Guide, p. 51). In
South African mining, this principle is not fully respected. During apartheid, black
workers had no real rights. Even today, the Marikana Massacre of 2012 shows that
workers’ basic safety and freedom are still not guaranteed. A mineworker cannot truly
exercise the same freedoms as a wealthy mine owner because poverty and lack of
options force them to accept dangerous conditions.
Principle 2a: Fair Equality of Opportunity.
The second principle says that any inequality is only fair if everyone has a real chance
to reach any position (SUS1501 Study Guide, p. 52). This is not true in this case. A child
born in a mining community does not have the same opportunity to become a billionaire
like Motsepe as a child born into a wealthy family. Also, a South African miner earns
Tuesday, 20 January 2026, 3:09 PM
Number of replies: 66
226675
ASSESSMENT 04:
FAIR'S FAIR
So, in assessment 2, we reflected on a particular case involving great wealth - Patrice Motsepe being
worth US$ 4.2 billion.
In assessment 3, we reflected on very severe poverty in South Africa where Motsepe comes from.
In this assessment we are going to think about the possibility that these two issues - great wealth and great
poverty - might be linked. Or as we said in one of the assignment 1 questions: “The wealth of a few
depends on the poverty of many.”
IS THIS OK? - Motsepe's wealth and high levels of poverty.
And this is what we are going to discuss in this assessment!
INSTRUCTIONS:
Step 0: Do assessment 1
If you haven't already done it, please go to the AT A CROSSROAD section and do Assessment 1 now.
YOU MAY GET 0 (ZERO) FOR THIS ASSESSMENT IF YOU HAVE NOT SUBMITTED
YOUR ASSESSMENT 1.
Step 1: Answer the question "Is this ok?" - COUNTS 60% OF MARKS
, Assessment 4: Fair’s Fair
1. An analysis of the inequalities described using ALL of John Rawls’ principles
in their correct order.
To judge whether it is okay for Patrice Motsepe to be so wealthy while many
mineworkers live in poverty, I will use John Rawls’ three principles in the order he said
they must be applied.
Principle 1: Greatest Equal Liberty.
Rawls said that every person must have equal basic rights, such as freedom of speech
and the right to be safe (Rawls, 1971, p. 60, cited in SUS1501 Study Guide, p. 51). In
South African mining, this principle is not fully respected. During apartheid, black
workers had no real rights. Even today, the Marikana Massacre of 2012 shows that
workers’ basic safety and freedom are still not guaranteed. A mineworker cannot truly
exercise the same freedoms as a wealthy mine owner because poverty and lack of
options force them to accept dangerous conditions.
Principle 2a: Fair Equality of Opportunity.
The second principle says that any inequality is only fair if everyone has a real chance
to reach any position (SUS1501 Study Guide, p. 52). This is not true in this case. A child
born in a mining community does not have the same opportunity to become a billionaire
like Motsepe as a child born into a wealthy family. Also, a South African miner earns
