While reading The Shadow of Unfairness - A Plebeian Theory of Liberal Democracy by Jeffrey Edward Green I came across the following statement -
It is just this unadulterated feeling of free and equal citizenship that the shadow of unfairness deems as a false expectation of political life within any conceivable liberal-democratic regime. However admirable the principle of free and equal citizenship in its abstraction, however remarkable the achievements at the institutional level that have been realized as a result of the commitment to this principle, however much these institutions may provide ordinary citizens with some experiential sense of being free and equal, and however much ongoing and future reforms (such as efforts to reduce the effects of socioeconomic status on opportunities for education and political engagement) might further enhance the scope and depth of this feeling, the fact remains that no ordinary citizen in a liberal democracy, either today or in a more enlightened future, can be expected to feel fully free and equal. The structure of the liberal-democratic regime will not allow it. This is what the shadow of unfairness indicates and announces.
For John Rawls a just liberal-democratic regime is one where - "social institutions within which human beings may develop their moral powers become fully cooperating members of a society of free and equal citizens".
Just to state; the term liberal-democracy here may be taken to encompass the the ideas of social liberalism and to a certain extent the civil liberties under the rule of law encompassed by more classical liberalism.
So, do you as a franchised citizen of a liberal democracy feel that you can ever feel fully free and equal?
Under what shadow of unfairness do you reside and what can be done to change this? Or, alternatively, are we limited by the fact that the guarantee and granting of more freedoms is asymptotic, or can there always be a continuous strive and granting of more personal liberty?