Social inequality as a constant in time
The French revolution made us think that inequality was going to cease to be the center of the problems that afflict us daily, and that the motto of "freedom, equality, fraternity" were really going to be put into practice by all democratic governments thatThey followed. It is true that we advance when leaving aside the vote by estate and giving rise to the vote by head. However, inequality remains a constant in time.
I don’t want to contradict myself: we move forward. Women and workers have the same rights as entrepreneurs, and therefore all three can vote thanks to equality before the law. Alexis de Tocqueville, in his work "Democracy in America", worried about seeing what life was like in a democratic society of equals and decided to travel to the United States. There, he concluded that equality is only fulfilled when we really believe that we must carry the same rights as the rest of the people, that is, he conceives it as a feeling. The author noticed that at that time, nineteenth century, African Americans were equal to the law and could go to vote, the problem is that none was going since they were afraid to die in the attempt, murdered by people who believed themselves superior to them.
While it seems very distant, it is not so like this: only in 1965 it was ended with racial segregation based on Jim Crow’s laws in the United States, whose motto, totally contradictory and meaningless was "separate but equal". From Tocqueville always argued that perfect democracy would be in line with freedom and equality. This last, longed for by most political systems, does not always end up being positive for all. The author will say that a democracy where equality is the worst.
Not only of Tocqueville is going to be shown against equality, but also Thomas Hobbes. The author, recognized by his work ‘Leviatán’, feared to return to a state of nature. When being in the same circumstances, prevailing equal conditions, and not being able to agree with each other due to the uncertainty that one of the two does not comply with the consensual, a war of all could be generated against all against all against all. It is thanks to this that Hobbes will find necessary the creation of a state, although it will go to the extreme, in my opinion, defending the absolute monarchy with a total subject to the sovereign.
Although I agree with Hobbes in the negative aspects of equal conditions, the most positive encounter the democratic and representative regime, since it would be the best way to progress thanks to the correct division of powers and the aforementioned mentioned, equality before the law. In addition, there is a large range of possibilities to choose the next representatives, although we end up finding that anyone never becomes totally fair with us, or at least this happens in Latin America.
Most of the time we vote for the "best" among the worst, and we usually. Neither you nor I listen to someone to say that the government did everything right, and if it does it would be branded as “fanatic” since it would not be recognizing the mistakes made, although it is true that no one is perfect and all the systems in somemoment they would make the incorrect decision or that the majority favor the majority. However, I recognize that another of the positive issues of democracy is the diversity of opinions. The latter is important as long as all opinions and minorities are respected in the debate to progress, as John Stuart Mill argues in his work "About freedom" . However, the author, like many liberals, fears the "tyranny of the majority" that silence, or steals the possibility of discussing humanity.
On the other hand, Friedrich Hayek, an Austrian philosopher, will sustain, in other words, that it is impossible to be a regime that represents us all. In his work "Road of servitude", he explains that planning, promoted by socialism, does not meet the needs of the whole society and tends to choose between multiple wishes, allowing someone to be prohibited to others. This is one of the systems that, despite carrying the flag of inclusion, does not usually open to hear the opinions of the opposition, but rather, ends up silencing them. To achieve a mass mobilization, it is forced to resort to manipulation through political propaganda, and even the daring of appealing to force to access power is taken. The dictators, or socialist leaders, must always opt between the resignation of ordinary moral values or the resounding regime failure.
The illusion of equality will fulfill a fundamental role in manipulation. In feudalism it was carried out thanks to the "model of the three orders" or "peace of God" imposed by the Church, but now it will be the media that support it with the help of the State, according to what Marx describes in itswritings mentioning the structures and superstructures that exist in all societies.
Nationalism, right and left movement will become a very important tool for mass manipulation. Through education, popular classes feel equal to the dominant, they believe that they really belong to the territory in which they are and fall into the illusion of the common well -being proposed by their rulers.
Xenophobia will be an instrument or a main consequence of nationalism, despite the distant that seems in our society: it is promoted by the majority of the population, both directly and indirectly. In the United States, an American politician and businessman characterized by his totally xenophobic and racist speeches such as Donald Trump, despite the plurality of cultures found there, and the diversity of stories that each one has, each. Without going any further, in Brazil, where much of the population has its origins in the slave labor, a military of the extreme right whose exhibitions coincide with those of the first world mentioned world, as contradictory that sounds, is currently president, as contradictory that sounds,appealing to machismo and social superiority.
So, to conclude, I ask you a question: why or for what purpose do we fight so much for equality, if in a world of equals we continue looking to feel superior to the rest?
Leave feedback