Confused: There doesn't appear to be a double-negative.

Sorry, my mistake.

If you want to steel man social justice, substitute the entire works of John Rawls.

The part of his work that I have read, consisted of him making a social contract-type argument saying that since the contract must be made before risk preferences, i.e., whether one is risk averse to risk loving are assigned, we should treat everyone as maximally risk averse. There was also some talk about utility that mostly consisted of him misunderstanding the concept. This did not leave me particularly inclined to read the rest.