Equality

[Didums]

I'll just go ahead and answer my questions lol

Equality in political rights?

Yes, if accomplished, it will be done before any other "equalities". Just looking at history for the past few hundred years, the trend of increasing political rights is likely unstoppable and will reach fruition soon enough. This is assuming that liberals continue winning the fight over reactionaries.

Edit: How quickly this happens is dependent on what country it is.

Equality in economic opportunities?

Unfortunately, those that are born into a rich family simply have more resources at their disposal than those that are born into poor families. Throughout history, the rich have done whatever was necessary to keep the poor from rising in status in order to profit from them. During and before the middle ages, the lack of a middle class prevented the poor from moving up at all, but even since the development of the middle class (which provided a medium by which the poor could improve their status), opportunity has still not been equal and will likely never be equal because society seems to necessitate the existence of different classes.

Social equality?

Minorities will always be picked on, it is simply human nature to single out those that are different from the herd because people find comfort in those that are the same as them. However, the blending of cultures (hopefully not this one..) and/or improvements in eductation may stop this trend.

Balance in power between nations?

Will never be accomplished. Resources are distributed unevenly (hence Trade) around the globe, and some nations are placed in just the right location, while others aren't so lucky.

 

[cascadeco]

haha....something I wrote years ago - forgive the lack of paragraphing and cohesiveness..it was rather freeform ---


I guess the bottom line is that while everyone likes to believe in equality and throw that phrase everywhere, it's really not the case when it comes down to it. The majority of individuals out there, like I've said before, aren't going to make any lasting impression on the world, and a select few will. So the leaders - the free thinkers - are in a different boat from the rest of humanity - sort of. And there is no equality when it comes to intelligence, or wealth, or community standing, or appearance, to name a few things, and there never will be, unless everything is genetically manipulated and the concept of freedom is thrown out the window in favor of regulation of every aspect of every individual's life. This may sound very un-American, but I hope there never will be equality, because if there was equality we would all be clones of one another. The very fact that leaders and authority figures are necessary for the human race means equality goes out the window -- note that I am thinking of equality more in the terms of "fairness", and everyone having the same cards dealt to them. If there was true equality, everyone would be identical to each other, in all aspects of their lives.

Now every human being should be, and is, on an equal standing in terms of their spirit and existance, meaning every human being has just as much right as another to be alive (ethics outside of this discussion to simplify it), but beyond that right to being and staying alive, equality leaves the picture. There will always be different economic groupings, unless like I said above we entered sci-fi-world of robots and regulation, and there will, at least for the time being, always be individuals who achieve far greater things and are much more capable of survival than others, however you want to define that. And intelligence plays a big role too, although unfortunately - like in history - conniving and shadiness can get you a lot farther ahead - however you want to define "farther ahead."

 

[Maabus1999]

Equality doesn't exist atm. It is impossible since everyone is genetically different. Throw in the aristocracy, and yeah it gets worse.

 

[Moiety]

Equality has never existed and never will exist. But balance is still important as a goal.

 

[EcK]

Equality has never existed and never will exist. But balance is still important as a goal.

Yeah, but 'All (wo)men are born free and balanced" wouldn't have much of a PR coup.

 

[Moiety]

Yeah, but 'All (wo)men are born free and balanced" wouldn't have much of a PR coup.

Balance as a goal, not as a right. As a right equality is just fine, even if it never really becomes a true reality in all cases. But it helps counter some of the injustice.

 

[Ardea]

Equality has never existed and never will exist. But balance is still important as a goal.

What is balance then?

 

[entropie]

Equality between two different things is an illusion. And I am not seperating body from soul here because that goes hand-to-hand.

 

[kyuuei]

I think that it's a good subject, but harder to debate. This sort of thing is easier to simply discuss. The fact of the matter is, the thought process of "no one is equal and never will be" seem so drab and overdone.

I don't think embracing differences in humanity should be the reason people don't think equality can exist.

Equality does not mean making everyone the same. It refers giving everyone a subjectively equal opportunity to enjoy the fruits of their labor.

A democratic society cannot function without at least an illusion of equality.

This is my thought process too. In it's simplest form: Men and women are both the same and very different.. but through their differences, can be 'equal' because each need the other in the end for humanity to be successful.

An even simpler example would be that a group of friends, even though they are all vastly different, end up equal to each other in the end of it all. You would not think someone you've just met is on the same 'level' as your group of friends. You need some sort of system of 'equality' for friendships to work at all.

Yes, but there's no telling whether you will be the carrier or the carried. Suppose you suffer a debilitating accident?

This is an excellent point. I don't think that people who do well or worse than I are unequal because there will be times I fall and need to be carried.. just like everyone does in their life. The important thing to remember is you make sure you don't stay down when you do fall.

People take advantage of this kindness as if it were a weakness.

Equality under the law, as far as one's civil rights is the only case that I think applies universially.

I still don't know how to respond to this. I want to agree.

The end point is that there has to be a universal equal, and a personal equality.. and the problem is that many times people's personal equalities don't match another person's.

 

[LostInNerSpace]

It’s an important ideal to aim for, virtually impossible to achieve in practice for now anyway. We naturally compare ourselves to other people on an on-going relative basis. People are in a sense pack animals. We are territorial and tend to align with various social groups and as members of those groups compare and contrast our group with other similar groups.

We see it at every level of society from political parties to street gangs. We have a natural built-in desire to defend our territory, whether that territory is physical or ideological. But our society is setup such that we must fight these natural instincts in order to move forward. We make more progress during times of relative peace and prosperity. That said, war often does simulate technological innovation--necessity being the mother of invention as it is.

ur oratory skills are so impressive.

Yes, I know. Thank you.

 

[Moiety]

What is balance then?

I meant balance in this particular case. Not "balance" as this ethereal concept.
Trying to balance things out is important. True equality is impossible to achieve, but completely giving up on it is not the answer I'd say. Hence balance - you win some you lose some, but you keep on fighting.



(that sounded righteous)

 

[ByMySword]

Equality is a nice utopia, but now the sad reality we have to accept is that your everyday joe doesn't help that process much, it's the bright and rare that do. But those are too often left behind for the sake of equality.

I agree with pretty much everything you've said.

But I'll say that you don't necessarily want to leave out the everyday joe altogether.

They're not the movers and shakers, mind you, but every society needs a backbone. For every leader there must be followers.

So I would say they do contribute to a point.

 

[EcK]

I agree with pretty much everything you've said.

But I'll say that you don't necessarily want to leave out the everyday joe altogether.

They're not the movers and shakers, mind you, but every society needs a backbone. For every leader there must be followers.

So I would say they do contribute to a point.

Indeed, but it would have taken me like 4 times longer to explain, and then i'd want to go one level deeper, and deeper, and deeper, until we have a book ready for publication.
So I usually stick to something superficial, it's a good time saver and long posts bore me, so I try not to torture my entp brethrens

I might quickly add that a too aristocratic system (read, aristocracy as ruled by the best not 'the nobility' ) has it's risks. Including ending up promoting social stagnation. But I believe the socio political zeitgeist of the western world has become quite excess-proof in those matters. The fact people complain about inequalities nowadays is in fact mainly due to an hypersensitivity to inequalities in our civilization. Which is both good and bad, for it produces negative externalities such as those I discussed before, summed up in the concept of 'equaling people down' and the impoverishment it bring to society.

 

[Ardea]

The fact people complain about inequalities nowadays is in fact mainly due to an hypersensitivity to inequalities in our civilization. Which is both good and bad, for it produces negative externalities such as those I discussed before, summed up in the concept of 'equaling people down' and the impoverishment it bring to society.

People realize that we're never "quite done yet" with evolving. We always need something to work towards. And whether we like it or not, we seem to want this sort of utopia, and will continue to work towards it. Call it a side effect of ratchet theory and post-materialist concerns. ((if these two concepts are intrinsically linked to humanity, then one can logically deduce that this progression is unavoidable!!! and that we were meant to do this!))

Whether we think this is good or not, we are going to work more and more towards something that is a bastardization of equality (because we are not perfect, nor would hierarchy function on such a concept). Equality doesn't and never will exist, but that will not stop us, as a whole, from trying. It's a universal move, so there is something that's forcing us into this evolution of sorts. Just sitting back and calling it impossible seems almost absurd, since we are all moving towards this goal together.

Perhaps... the more we have, the less we want... or is it the more we want to give...

 

[Lateralus]

Equality before the law is all we should strive for. Anything more leads toward this...

[YOUTUBE="YKHzFWkH0Po"]Harrison Bergeron[/YOUTUBE]

 

[Ardea]

We should be equal to be more than just X. But when we are only free to be X, justified by certain standards, we cannot be more than it.

That little movie thing... we all ready have it. An SJ world... "it's just that way..."

I don't, won't, can't buy it.

We should be free to be more than something. Equal gives us that opportunity. Perhaps there is a paradigm problem here.

Have any of you ever studied minority/women/lgbt psychology, sociology, politics, or literature?

You guys seem to think that being equal would hinder you, instead of free you. Perhaps we are coming from two different sides of society...

 

[Qre:us]

Equality does not mean making everyone the same. It refers giving everyone a subjectively equal opportunity to enjoy the fruits of their labor.

A democratic society cannot function without at least an illusion of equality.

YES! To take that further, if we subscribe to Locke's concept of equality when forming a common-wealth, it means that equality is such that every individual born has a right, not a priviledge, to be free from opression, and marginalization, regardless of race, religion, creed, and/or any other inherent human differences. (very much so Charter of Rights..hmmm)

It is not so much in terms of absolutes that we must focus on equality. It is not so much with an expectation to achieve an ideal social milieu, but, the very act of striving towards equality, that is of utmost importance. To cry for equality is to make a stand towards, not with an end in sight, but, a direction - forward, not stagnant, and not backwards.

A retard who'll never amount to anything in his life will get about 20times the support given to a smart, interesting, and curious kid.
How does that even make sense.

It is not about 1-to-1 efficiency of input to output. It is more about a sustainable efficiency of society, indicative of how we treat the 'worst of the worst', the vulnerable, the ones on the fringes of society. Every normal distribution will have those lying along the extremes. It is a natural occurance. By extrapolating your logic, we would flat out in no time. Potential, paradoxically, would not be maximized, but, reach a plateau, if we didn't account for the extremes. Hence, the direction of *how* we account for the extremes, thus, becomes of importance.

 

[kyuuei]

I think there's a degree of power and personal bias obsession for people that don't think of equality as necessary.

It almost seems like.. If you want equality, you're striving for something that's simply impossible in the eyes of others. But to me.. people who care little for it seem to cling to power struggles and people being "more" or "less" than other people.

 

[Anja]

I understand what you're saying, kyuuei. It's like carrying the dichotomy in their thoughts gives it more power than it deserves.

In my experience equality isn't something that can be given to you. For me it's been something I have had to take for myself. Assume my spot. BE equal.

 

[Lateralus]

I think there's a degree of power and personal bias obsession for people that don't think of equality as necessary.

It almost seems like.. If you want equality, you're striving for something that's simply impossible in the eyes of others. But to me.. people who care little for it seem to cling to power struggles and people being "more" or "less" than other people.

This depends on how you define equality. If you're talking about equality of outcome, then equality is in direct conflict with freedom.