The goal of this paper is to identify and justify a normative principle that allows for an identification of inequalities incompatible with educational justice. To reach that goal, three alternative versions of egalitarianism are discussed: luck egalitarianism, threshold (minimalist) egalitarianism, and respect egalitarianism. Respect egalitarianism can be closely linked to the model of epistemic justice, which was recently the subject of intensive, far reaching discussions in the field of philosophy of education. This paper argues that the approaches of both luck egalitarianism and threshold egalitarianism are inadequate to satisfy the aim of this paper. Luck egalitarianism entails the “bottomless pit problem” that seems to be conceptually and politically unsolvable. Additionally, luck egalitarians tend to interpret education as a positional, distributive good whose primary value is extrinsic. This stance ignores that education is foremost concerned with the growth of knowledge—a non-positional good whose worth is primarily intrinsic. On the other hand, threshold egalitarians do not offer a conceptual means of discriminating between just and unjust educational inequalities that lie above the capability threshold required by individuals to participate in the political life of society and/or to live a life of dignity.
The Euromaidan rallies and the Revolution of Dignity in Ukraine in 2013-2014 were both a remarkable and unimaginable event in recent European history. They captured the minds of activists, commentators, and politicians, in addition becoming the topic of often ardent and contentious debates. During the three months when the civic protests evolved into a successful but violent uprising against the then corrupt regime of Viktor Yanukovych, the democratically-elected but increasingly authoritarian president of the country, most of the discussions, however, came to focus either on the international geopolitical perspective, the domestic high politics or the role of the far right in the crisis. Ultimately, following Russia’s military intervention which led to occupation and annexation of Crimea and the appearance of a Russian-backed armed separatist insurgency in the Donbas, most of these debates left the original grassroots dynamics of the Euromaidan rallies in the shadow.