> When different soical groups are (a) mutually dependent but (b) have
> antagonistic interests, the outcome of the resulting struggle is
> Justice. Justice has no role in any contextin which there are no
> objective conflicts of interest. Neither does it have any role in a
> social order in which the group in which antagonistic groups are not
> mutually dependent: in this case genocide replaces justice.
>
If "universal" ethical principles are wholly positive, as in the idea of ideal relations as relations of mutual recognition, "justice," which, as you point out, implies "antagonistic interests," won't be among them.
It may not be accurate, therefore, to describe relations that depart from this ideal as "unjust."
What you claim above, however, seems to have the implication that the superstitious, prejudiced, sadistic, vengeful feelings of a mob with the "power" to carry out successfully actions based on them would issue in "Justice."
Ted