# Joseph Heath Professor of Philosophy at the **[[Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy]]**. His work spans ethics, political philosophy, and public policy, with a particular focus on institutional design and the intersection of market failures and social justice. **Online**: [Substack (In Due Course)](https://josephheath.substack.com/) **Organization**: [[University of Toronto (UT)]] **Location**: Toronto, Canada --- ## Entries ### Anodyne Privatization (2023) [_Heath, J. (2023). Anodyne Privatization. Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics, 16(2), 25-65._](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/376381963_Anodyne_Privatization) - Heath argues that the left should be less skeptical of privatization. - He differentiates between the state as a **service provider** versus the state as a **universal funder**. - Highlights that privatization is often driven by the state's inability to generate value through procurement activities. - Argues that by clinging to services it cannot deliver effectively, the state fuels public skepticism regarding its capacity to manage essential "core" functions like healthcare and social security. ### Harm-Reduction and Racism (2024) _Includes "[A Harm-Reduction Approach to Attitudinal Racism](https://www.academia.edu/120938660/A_Harm_Reduction_Approach_to_Attitudinal_Racism)" and "[Consequentialism for Deontologists: The Harm-Reduction Approach](https://www.academia.edu/120938603/Consequentialism_for_Deontologists_The_Harm_Reduction_Approach)."_ - Proposes a philosophical middle ground for addressing racism that avoids both "Woke" frameworks and traditional Marxist reductions (where only class is relevant). - Suggests treating prejudice as a persistent social tendency to be managed via institutional design (like a public health issue) rather than solely as a moral failure to be denounced. ### "Why Are Racial Problems in the United States So Intractable?" (2021) [_Published in American Affairs, Vol. V, No. 3._](https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2021/08/why-are-racial-problems-in-the-united-states-so-intractable/) - **Comparative analysis**: Contrasts Singapore’s **outcome-focused** racial management (ensuring proportional representation) with Canada’s **procedural neutrality** (aimed at immigrant integration) and territorial self-governance for Francophones and Indigenous peoples. - **The US mismatch**: Argues Black Americans are a "deterritorialized national minority" that fits neither model. The US seeks Singaporean-style outcomes while building institutions designed for Canadian-style procedural freedom. This "means-ends mismatch" is more explanatory than "structural racism." - **Wicked problems**: Compares racial management to "bureaucracy" - efforts to solve it through one ideological lens often deepen the problem for another. This lack of consensus among well-intentioned actors prevents the formation of "solving coalitions," making the issue uniquely intractable.