So, what does it say?

There's a phenomena in psychological studies called the "just world" phenomena. Basically, it states that most people, to one degree or another, equate outcomes to actions or choices, even when the two are either not closely or not at all related. An interesting quote I found on the subject was:

“Zick Rubin of Harvard University and Letitia Anne Peplau of UCLA have conducted surveys to examine the characteristics of people with strong beliefs in a just world. They found that people who have a strong tendency to believe in a just world also tend to be more religious, more authoritarian, more conservative, more likely to admire political leaders and existing social institutions, and more likely to have negative attitudes toward underprivileged groups. To a lesser but still significant degree, the believers in a just world tend to ‘feel less of a need to engage in activities to change society or to alleviate plight of social victims.’”
-- Claire Andre and Manuel Velasquez from an essay at The Markkula Center for Applied Ethics

So, it kind of makes me wonder, when politicians or people of a "progressive" mindset talk about "fairness" and things that people "deserve", are they exercising "just world" thinking? Are they more or less like what's described in the preceding paragraph? I suppose, in the end, it comes down to what you do about your perceptions of "just", "fairness" and "deserve": is it the basis for taking action or is it just the basis for bemoaning the state of the world.

Maybe it's only loosely related or not even related at all.