In a world where inequality and wealth concentration are growing problems, more and more young people are questioning the current economic system and looking for alternatives. Although capitalism is globally dominant, it fails to ensure a fair distribution of resources for all. But are there different paths? Can societies be organized in a more just way?
What is justice, really?
Justice is not a universally defined concept. In the context of resource distribution, two key dimensions are often discussed: distributive justice (e.g., equal income) and procedural justice (e.g., everyone having an equal chance to participate in decision-making). Traditional liberal theories often start from the assumption that markets are inherently fair because they enable free exchange. However, in reality, that “freedom” often conceals unequal starting positions. For instance, some inherit wealth and education, while others begin from the social margins. As a result, the market reproduces injustice instead of correcting it.
Epistemic justice – who gets a say?
One of the key concepts in thinking about justice is epistemic justice—the idea that everyone should have the right to participate in the creation of knowledge and decision-making. In a capitalist system, economic decisions are most often made by experts, investors, or politicians, while those whose lives are most affected by those decisions are largely excluded. Epistemic justice requires the opposite—inclusion of diverse perspectives, especially those that are otherwise marginalized. In practice, this means that workers, consumers, minorities, and other groups must have real power in decision-making, —not just a formal right to vote. This approach is crucial for alternative economic models.
Alternative economic models
In response to these problems, various alternatives to capitalism have been developed, notably participatory economics (parecon) and solidarity and social economies.
Participatory economics, developed by Michael Albert and Robin Hahnel, is based on the idea that people collectively plan the economy through participatory councils, rather than leaving decisions to the market or the state. In such a system, resource distribution is based not on profit but on the needs and contributions of each member of the community. Everyone is included in decision-making, and economic power is decentralized.
Solidarity economics, on the other hand, emphasizes cooperation, mutual aid, and social responsibility. Here, economic activities—whether cooperatives, social enterprises, or local currencies—are organized to meet community needs, rather than to generate profit for capital owners.
What these models have in common is their emphasis on egalitarianism, participatory decision-making, and social purpose. They represent concrete alternatives to a system where wealth is concentrated in the hands of a few, while the majority live paycheck to paycheck.
Fair distribution – more than equality
It’s also important to understand the difference between equality and justice. Justice does not always mean that everyone receives the same, but that everyone receives what they need. Someone who is seriously ill may need more resources than someone who is perfectly healthy, —and that is fair. In this sense, fair distribution takes context and human needs into account.
Alternative systems try to integrate this idea through participation and collective decision-making, —so that the community itself determines how and to whom resources are distributed, instead of the “invisible hand” of the market doing so.
The role of young people in alternative economies
For young people, especially those facing precarious working conditions, high housing costs, and the climate crisis, these models offer space for action and change. Instead of being passive users of a system they cannot influence, they can become active participants in shaping more just communities. Examples already exist in practice—youth cooperatives, student co-ops, social enterprises, and climate collectives across Europe demonstrate how different ways of organizing work and the economy can be successfully implemented.
In conclusion – can we do things differently?
Although capitalism is often presented as the only possible option, the truth is that alternatives exist—not just in theory, but in everyday practices around the world. These are systems that do not ignore economic realities, but reshape them to be more just, more solidaristic, and more democratic.
It is important to recognize the injustices in the system that surrounds us, but also to imagine and build systems that can correct them. It may not be simple, but it is possible. And maybe it is up to us to take the first step.
This article is based on the master’s thesis “Justice and the Distribution of Resources in Alternatives to Capitalism” by Irena Hojsak, written at The Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences in Rijeka as a part of the Cultural Studies.
