Equal rights and egalitarianism

[bluethread]

This being Martin Luther King Day, many commemorate the principle of equal rights on this day. What specifically do you believe that principle to be and on what do you believe it to be based? Does it mean that everyone is to be treated exactly the same? If not, when should individuals be treated the same and on what basis?

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 1 by bluethread]

Equality is an illusion. A god of the present age if you will.

It's basis is in the corruption of the golden rule. Let's force others to treat us as we want to be treated.

Even the notion of equality under the law (the best we should hope for) fails because of its coercion but that is where we should and I could try to defend equality.

[Bust Nak]

[Replying to post 2 by Wootah]

Sounds like you are suggesting one shouldn't one be coerced to comply with equality under law? Why not?

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 3 by Bust Nak]

The more i think about it the more i think the law is an illusion - a sedative for the masses.

We know the law is not justly applied across incomes or race or class.

But we obey because of the illusion.

Its one of the many gods non religious people will die for

[Divine Insight]

This being Martin Luther King Day, many commemorate the principle of equal rights on this day. What specifically do you believe that principle to be and on what do you believe it to be based? Does it mean that everyone is to be treated exactly the same? If not, when should individuals be treated the same and on what basis?

From a practical perspective I agree with and support that everyone should be treated equally. And especially given equal opportunities from early childhood. How anyone could argue against this is beyond me.

Implementing this in practice may not be easy. But it's certainly a principle that we should strive to achieve. And there's really no reason why it can't be achieved, barring hostile politics that works to undermine this goal for ulterior motives.

But the goal of humanity should be to help every human be the best they can be. Why should any human argue otherwise unless they have some selfish greedy intent that is not in favor of humanity as a whole?

[bluethread]

But the goal of humanity should be to help every human be the best they can be. Why should any human argue otherwise unless they have some selfish greedy intent that is not in favor of humanity as a whole?

Then are you of the opinion that everyone has the same potential?

[Divine Insight]

But the goal of humanity should be to help every human be the best they can be. Why should any human argue otherwise unless they have some selfish greedy intent that is not in favor of humanity as a whole?

Then are you of the opinion that everyone has the same potential?

What would that have to do with treating everyone equally?

[William]

[Replying to post 1 by bluethread]

I think our present systems of disparity are reflections of evil.

I have a post in my Members Notes titled;

The Necessity of Changing Our Present Systems of Disparity.

Moving from a Type Zero Species to a Type One Species

♦ A System of Parity

♦ A System of disparity = a system of the Antichrist.

♦ 'Utopia' is the natural product of a system of parity.

♦ Is human nature really greed and corruption?

Therein one can get a handle on what I think of inequality and answers to your OP questions.

[William]

But the goal of humanity should be to help every human be the best they can be. Why should any human argue otherwise unless they have some selfish greedy intent that is not in favor of humanity as a whole?

Then are you of the opinion that everyone has the same potential?

What would that have to do with treating everyone equally?

Wouldn't it be at least a step in that direction? How people are treated can affect their potential.

[Divine Insight]

But the goal of humanity should be to help every human be the best they can be. Why should any human argue otherwise unless they have some selfish greedy intent that is not in favor of humanity as a whole?

Then are you of the opinion that everyone has the same potential?

What would that have to do with treating everyone equally?

Wouldn't it be at least a step in that direction? How people are treated can affect their potential.

How people are treated can certainly affect how much of their potential can achieved. But it's not going to change their underlying potential. Most of us do not achieve anywhere near our full potential. In order for that to happen we would need to do more than just treat people equally. We would need to actually focus in on mentoring and encouraging every individual to achieve their full potential. That would certainly be a great goal as well. But before that goal could even be considered we would need to start by treating everyone equally.

In fact, some people are very well-mentored, coached, and encouraged. Others are not. So there is great disparity in that as well. In fact, that disparity often amounts to a difference in financial class. In other words, poor people simply can't afford to pay personal mentors, coaches, and teachers etc., whilst rich people can.

But this comes down to a different topic entirely. Now we're talking about the difference between a society based on competition (i.e. Capitalism) versus a society based on cooperation (i.e. *Socialism).

Note: Most people (including dictionaries) often define socialism as nothing more than a government or community run capitalism. But that's not the true meaning of socialism. All that definition amounts to is capitalism being run by the state.

A true socialism is when the community itself cooperates by each individual freely contributing to the whole. We have no earthly examples of a true socialism because every example we have on earth of "Socialism" are actually examples of state-run capitalism were the "state" is not the community, but instead it is some small body of government or dictators making laws that tell the community what they must do. That's not people cooperating freely. That's just a state-run capitalism being called "socialism".

In any case, this is way off topic from equality.

Equality in a capitalistic society isn't going to change the fact that capitalism is necessarily competitive. So even in an egalitarian capitalism competition will still necessarily exist.