ate, using the concept of “invisible hand”. By this, he means that the formation of the political is jus tified by the nonpolitical. So, without explicit appealing to the political concepts, the s tate can be jus tified. This s tate, i. e. the minimal s tate, raised from the private Contracts between people, has the main duty to protect from citizens. In the sconed part of his book, after introducing the “entitlement theory of jus tice”, he argues that all s tates beyond the minimal s tate are illegitimate. The main arguments for these kinds of s tates are realizing Social jus tice, so Nozick rejects these arguments. By analyzing Nozick’s argument agains t Social jus tice, I show that these arguments are invalid. Then by critical analysis of invisible hand, it is shown that firs t, this method leads to rejection of the basic s tructure of society as a subject jus tice (the Rawlsian assumption), and second, this conception of political jus tification method with the particular Nozick’s conceptions of Lockean proviso, rejects all egalitarian views. So, Nozick’s presuppositions in the firs t part of the book are inconsis tent with all kinds of s tates beyond the minimal s tate.