part(1) Principle for a Free Society EQUALITY

[William M. Finley]

 

Equality

“All men have equal rights but not to equal things.”

Edmund Burke

What is equality?

Equality is the principle that people should be treated the same or

equally. Yet people are obviously not the same or ‘equal’ in most of

their characteristics, in talents, abilities, looks or preferences. No one

believes that every human being is the same, so in what sense are people

equal? The debate about equality is about when it is, and is not, right

to treat people the same. At least five different types of equality can be

identified: moral (or formal) equality, equality before the law, political

equality, equality of opportunity, and equality of outcome. The first

three types are desirable; the last is highly undesirable; and the value of

equal opportunity depends upon how it is interpreted.

For most of the history of the world, equality was ignored as a moral

principle, or viewed as inconceivable and incompatible with reality. It

was considered normal that people should be treated in different ways,

such as different laws for barons and peasants. An early statement of

equality can be found in Aristotle when he proclaimed that no distinction

should be made between men who are equal in all respects relevant

to the issue in question, which of course raises the question of ‘what is

relevant?’ Christianity preached the principle that all souls were equally

worthy in the sight of God.

Thomas Hobbes claimed that men were equal in the state of nature, but it

was such an undesirable state of affairs, in which life was “solitary, nasty,

brutish and short,” men were eager to surrender this equality for order

under a strong ruler, the Leviathan. As so often in the history of modern

philosophy, a decisive break occurred under John Locke. He maintained

that men had equal rights in the state of nature, but retained them under

political rule. These rights to life, liberty and property belonged to all

human beings. It was in this sense of equal rights that the American

Declaration of Independence declared that “all men are created equal.” Its

- 20 -

author, Thomas Jefferson, elsewhere strongly denounced those who felt

there was a natural hierarchy and that people should know their place in

society. “The mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their

backs, nor a favoured few booted and spurred ready to ride them legitimately

by the grace of God.” The nineteenth century was a period of struggle

to establish the implications of equal rights in the abolition of slavery,

the provision of the principle of equality before the law, and political equality

in which all citizens were entitled to an equal right to vote. However,

women did not receive the vote in many countries until the early twentieth

century, and blacks and coloureds were denied equal political and property

rights in the South Africa of apartheid. It was in that century, with the rise

of socialism and communism, that equality became commonly associated

with material equality or ‘equality of results.’ The principle of equal opportunity

also gained ground in that century but then was transformed into a

different principle, almost identical to that of equal results.

Moral equality

Every human being is morally worthy of consideration, with the right to

make choices about their lives. This arises from their existence as a

human being, and is based on the belief that there are certain things

which every human being has in common with every other human

being (notably natural or human rights) and that made them worthy of

respect. Just because someone is of a different religion, or nationality, or

gender, does not mean that they do not matter. As a human being, one

has the right to live one’s life as one chooses, provided one does not

invade the lives of others. This is why such beliefs are in opposition to,

and would seek to ban, slavery, as the slave is forbidden the right to live

his own chosen life. Immanuel Kant developed a rule following from

this presumption of formal equality, sometimes called the categorical

imperative: “do unto others as you would have done to you.”

This is not of course to say that everyone is morally equal in their

behaviour. Clearly there are some people who behave better than others,

and some who commit evil acts. However, their lives remain of value.

Unfortunately there is no agreed consensus on the correct term to use

for this sense of equality. Various terms include formal equality, moral

- 21 -

equality, equality of status, equality of worth, and equality of respect;

none of them truly capture this principle.

Equality before the law

The most important political consequence of the acceptance of moral

equality is best identified in the principle of legal equality or equality

before the law. This states that the law should treat people impartially,

regardless of irrelevant characteristics, such as nationality, ethnic group,

wealth, class, gender, religion, or race. This is why justice is ‘blind’ to all

factors other than those directly related to the case. Legal equality is thus

strongly linked to the principle of the rule of law. Equality before the

law was the basis for the early claims of the women’s rights movement

that women should be entitled to the same legal rights as men, such as

the right to own property and to vote.

The Roman orator Cicero noted the moral distinction between different

types of equality. “While it is undesirable to equalize wealth, and everyone

cannot have the same talents, legal rights at least should be equal

among citizens of the same commonwealth.” The French Declaration of

the Rights of Man in 1789 stated that the law “should be the same for

all...and all being equal in its sight, are equally eligible to all honours,

places and employments, according to their different abilities, without

any other distinction than that created by their virtue and talents.”