Chapter 03: Equality

Why does Equality Matter?

The ideal of equality has been a significant moral and political force,
inspiring human society for many centuries.

As a political concept, equality upholds the notion that every individual

possesses equal worth, regardless of their gender, race, colour, or
nationality.

It asserts that human beings merit equal consideration and regard, owing
to their shared humanity.

Nowadays, the principle of equality is widely acknowledged, and is

enshrined in the constitutions and laws of numerous countries.

However, the prevalence of inequality, rather than equality, is conspicuous

both globally and domestically. We observe slums coexisting alongside
luxurious housing in our own society.

Paradoxe

One of the greatest paradoxes of our time is that while the ideal of equality
is widely accepted, inequality is still prevalent in almost all aspects of life.

Despite the recognition of the inherent worth and dignity of every human
being, inequality still persists in various forms such as unequal distribution
of wealth, limited opportunities, discriminatory work practices, and unequal
distribution of power

This paradox highlights the challenges that society faces in realizing the
ideal of equality, and calls for a deeper understanding of the complex
interplay of social, economic, and political factors that perpetuate
inequality.

Efforts to address this paradox must involve a comprehensive approach

that takes into account the multifaceted nature of inequality, and seeks to
create a society that promotes fairness, justice, and equal opportunities for
all.
What is Equality?

Treating people with equal respect does not necessarily mean treating
them in an identical manner.

No society treats all of its members equally under every circumstance.

A smoothly functioning society requires the division of labor and functions,

and individuals often have different statuses and rewards because of it.

At times, these differences in treatment may seem acceptable or even

necessary. For instance, providing prime ministers or army generals with a
special official rank and status is typically seen as compatible with the
notion of equality, as long as their privileges are not abused.

Which distinctions and differences are acceptable and which are

not?

It is considered an unacceptable form of inequality when people are

treated differently simply because of their religion, race, caste, or gender.

People may have varying ambitions and goals, and not all will be equally
successful.

The commitment to the ideal of equality does not entail the elimination of all
differences.

It simply implies that the treatment we receive and the opportunities we

have must not be predetermined by birth or social circumstances.

Equality of Opportunities

The concept of equality suggests that all people, as human beings, have
the same rights and opportunities to develop their skills and talents and to
pursue their goals and aspirations.

People have different talents and skills, resulting in some being more
successful in their chosen careers than others.
It is not the lack of equality of status, wealth, or privilege that is significant
but the inequalities in people's access to basic goods such as education,
healthcare, and safe housing, that create an unjust and unequal society.

Natural and Social Inequalities

Natural Inequalities

Natural inequalities arise between individuals due to their diverse

capabilities and talents.

These inequalities are distinct from socially-produced inequalities, which

emerge due to inequalities of opportunity or exploitation of some groups in
society by others.

These inequalities are considered the result of the different characteristics

and abilities with which people are born.

Social Inequalities

These inequalities are created by society.

Certain societies may value those who perform intellectual work more
highly than those who perform manual labor and reward them differently.

Societies may treat people differently based on their race, color, gender, or
caste.

These differences reflect the values of a society, and some may be viewed
as unjust.

Other Problems

This distinction is sometimes useful in distinguishing between acceptable

and unjust inequalities in society, but it is not always clear or self-evident.

When certain inequalities in the treatment of people have persisted for a

long time, they may appear justifiable because they are based on natural
inequalities, that is, characteristics that people are born with and cannot
easily change.
 For instance, women were once described as the weaker sex, considered
timid and less intelligent than men, and believed to require special
protection. Therefore, it was thought that denying women equal rights could
be justified.

Another issue with the idea of natural differences is that some differences
that could be considered natural may no longer be regarded as unalterable.

For instance, advances in medical science and technology have aided

many individuals with disabilities to function effectively in society.

Today, computers can assist visually impaired individuals, wheelchairs and

artificial limbs can aid those with physical disabilities, and cosmetic surgery
can alter a person's appearance. It would seem unjust to most people
today if disabled individuals were denied necessary help to overcome the
effects of their disability or a fair reward for their work on the grounds that
they are naturally less capable.

These complexities make it difficult to use the natural/socially-produced

distinction as a standard by which to assess the laws and policies of a
society.

Three Dimensions of Equality

Various thinkers and ideologies have identified three main dimensions of

equality: political, social, and economic while recognizing different kinds of
inequalities that exist in society.

Political Equality:

In democratic societies, political equality grants equal citizenship to all

members of the state, including basic rights such as the right to vote,
freedom of expression, movement and association, and freedom of belief.
However, significant inequality can still exist due to differences in resources
and opportunities, so a demand is often made for equal opportunities or a
'level playing field.'

Social Equality:
 Political equality needs to be supplemented by equality of opportunities to
pursue justice and remove any legal hurdles that might exclude people
from a voice in government and deny them access to social goods. To
achieve this, people belonging to different groups and communities should
have a fair and equal chance to compete for those goods and
opportunities. In India, the state has a significant role to play in preventing
discrimination against women and providing incentives to open up
education or certain professions to them.

Economic Equality:

Economic inequality exists in a society if there are significant differences in

wealth, property or income between individuals or classes. Measuring the
relative difference between the richest and poorest groups and estimating
the number of people who live below the poverty line are two ways to
measure the degree of economic inequality.

Marxism and liberalism are two important political ideologies of our times
that have different views on how to tackle inequality.

Marxism:

Marx argued that private ownership of essential economic resources, such

as oil, land, or forests, is the root cause of entrenched inequality that gives
political power to the class of owners, posing a threat to democratic
government. Marxists and socialists believe that economic inequality
provides support to other forms of social inequality and advocate for public
control over essential resources and forms of property.

Liberalism:

Liberals uphold the principle of competition as the most efficient and fair
way of distributing resources and rewards in society. They believe that
while states may have to intervene to ensure a minimum standard of living
and equal opportunities for all, competition should be open and free, and
inequalities in each of the spheres should be tackled appropriately. Unlike
socialists, liberals do not believe that political, economic, and social
inequalities are necessarily linked.
How can we promote Equality?

We need to consider if the use of affirmative action is justified for purposes

of bringing about equality.

Establishing Formal Equality

The first step towards bringing about equality is ending the formal system
of inequality and privileges.

Social, economic and political inequalities all over the world have been
protected by customs and legal systems that prohibited some sections of
society from enjoying certain kinds of opportunities and rewards.

Attainment of equality requires that all such restrictions or privileges should

be brought to an end. This is what Indian Constitution does.

The Constitution prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race,

caste, sex or place of birth. Indian Constitution also abolishes the practice
of untouchability.

Most modern constitutions and democratic governments have formally

accepted the principle of equality and incorporated it as identical treatment
by law to all citizens without any regard to their caste, race, religion or
gender.

Equality Through Differential Treatment

Sometimes it is necessary to treat people differently in order to ensure that

they can enjoy equal rights.

For example, disabled people may justifiably demand special ramps in

public spaces so that they get an equal chance to enter public buildings.

Some countries have used policies of affirmative action to enhance equality

of opportunity. In India, we have relied on the policy of reservations.

Affirmative Action

Affirmative action is based on the idea that it is not sufficient to establish

formal equality by law.
 Affirmative action can however take many forms, from preferential
spending on facilities for disadvantaged communities, such as,
scholarships and hostels to special consideration for admissions to
educational institutions and jobs.

In our country we have adopted a policy of quotas or reserved seats in

education and jobs to provide equality of opportunity to deprived groups.
This has been the subject of considerable debate and disagreement.

Special assistance in the form of affirmative action is expected to be a

temporary or time-bound measure.

Critics of positive discrimination contend that any provision of reservations

or quotas for the deprived in admissions for higher education or jobs is
unfair as it arbitrarily denies other sections of society their right to equal
treatment.

In the context of this debate, it is relevant to draw a distinction between

equality as a guiding principle of state policy and equal rights of individuals.

Individuals have a right to equal consideration for admission to educational

institutions and public sector employment.

Members of excluded groups, whether they are dalits, women, or any

other category, deserve and need some special help. To provide this, the
state must devise social policies which would help to make such people
equal and give them a fair chance to compete with others.

The spheres of education and health care India has done far less for its
deprived population than what is their due.

Social and economic inequalities of this kind hinder the pursuit of equal
opportunities.

The policies that we choose would have to be justified in terms of their

success in making the society more egalitarian and fair to all.

On the issue of equality, a distinction must also be made between treating

everyone in an identical manner and treating everyone as equal.
Differential or special treatment may be considered to realise the goal of
equality but it requires justification and careful reflection.

Many of these issues relating to the pursuit of equality have been raised by
the women’s movement. In the nineteenth century women struggled for
equal rights. They demanded, for instance, the right to vote, the right to
receive degrees in colleges and universities and the right to work — that is,
the same rights as the men in their society.

As they entered the job market they realised that women required special
facilities in order to exercise these rights.

Differential treatment is intended and justified only as a means to

promoting a just and egalitarian society.