Summary
System justification theory holds that people are motivated to see the social arrangements they live under as fair and legitimate, even when those arrangements work against them. It was set out in 1994 by psychologists John Jost and Mahzarin Banaji, to explain why members of disadvantaged groups sometimes think well of higher-status groups and poorly of their own.
The theory’s answer is that believing the system is just brings comfort: it meets needs for order and certainty and eases anger and guilt about inequality. One cited finding: women paid less than men often judge that they deserve less. Critics from social identity theory dispute that a separate motive is needed.
Rationale
It offers one answer to Part 2’s question, “What holds the current contexts in place, and who does that serve?”: partly the comfort of believing them fair, felt even by the people they serve least.