The Concept of Social Equity

The idea of social justice and the ideal of equity have become commonplace in modern society. But, what no asks is, why do we have to take from one person to serve equity to someone who is less fortunate? Why do we have to attack someone else and deprive them of opportunities just to give someone else a chance?

Some might respond that these individuals are subconsciously making them feel inadequate, hence the (for lack of a better term) hostility. We’re seeing it now with things like “skinny shaming” and “Y-T.”

This is my issue with the libertarian left because the ideals of the libertarian left, at its most pure, is only a fantasty. There is no way to completely purify anyone of racism, or misogyny, or ableism, or classism, or any other form of prejudice- and I blame the constant focus on status politics. Granted, from what I gather, racism for example was pretty bad in the '60s (Little Rock Nine), but the way the issue has been addressed by the Left is all wrong.

I remembered reading Harrison Bergeron. It was a short story written in 1961, in what is basically a Communist dystopia. There is a couple whose son has been taken from them (and later on it is revealed he escaped from prison). People who had above average intelligence had to wear a radio that would emit some static sound to interrupt any extended thought. Some people had to wear weights, if they were athletically gifted, or masks if they were attractive, because the government did not want anyone to feel bad about themselves. The son wore a large radio headphones, a mask, and 300 lbs of weights. He was taken because he was a threat.

This story is fiction, but isn’t it a more extreme form of what’s going on and where society is headed? People having to be handicapped, so less privileged individuals didn’t feel oppressed?

Once again, I must ask: why do we have to bring other people down to raise others up?

1 Like

Another question: can we as humans truly eliminate competition, and capitalism, entirely?

I will read this when I am feeling philosophical.


Short answer, No.

Sparknotes argues that Harrison Bergeron (the son of George and Hazel, who demonstrate despite their gifts, are compliant with the government), that he represents “the concept of individuality and defiance that still exists in some Americans…an exaggerated alpha male that hungers for power.”

He has these delusions of being “the greatest emperor that has ever lived.” He also reminds the ballerinas, when he takes off his handicaps, that they too are talented and beautiful beneath them. But he and the ballerina that stands with him are shot on site.

So in the story it seems as though “defiance” is something that takes a long time to squash, but its days are numbered. However there will always be those who catch on to the situation and choose to stay quiet so as to self-preservation. These individuals are the ones who will collaborate underground, away from Big Brother’s eye.

I take it Harrison was more in a delirium due to his resentment for the government that festered, his being in a confined space with no chance of seeing another human, and his intelligence that made his mind run in circles because of not having any outlet or stimulation.

It’s less philosophical and more political I’m afraid. These people who enforce such a world simply feel they must be needed. And since those with strengths don’t need these people, the strong are anathema to the unicorn equal world of the enforcers. Now there is a subculture within the “MUST.BE.NEEDED” tribe who are, themselves, talented and strong in some way. And THEY adapt this “MUST.BE.NEEDED” feeling to a sense of responsibility to create new man - an equal man. Thus they are needed to suppress those who may be strong. You can identify this subculture because they will often tell you of their gifts- be they in money, ancestry, intelligence, physical strength - and then say something like " and yet I, even I of such privilege, renounce my privilege so that all can be equal." They do that only so long as they can continue to exercise what they believe is their God given responsibility to tell others how to live … to tell the strong, the pretty, the wealthy, the industrious and independent… to not be.

It’s a sickness. That’s all.

1 Like

Why would that be?

Yes, indeed. And how can anyone give to those who are not well off if the givers are handicapped themselves?

ETA: Oh wait, there is the gubberment. Still, if you handicap a generation, who succeeds into the elite?

Mankind is a natural combination of infinitely diverse factors and features, some the result of nature: physical ability and appearance, some mental abilities, emotional disposition, desires and some developed from our environment: Attitudes, morals, societal norms. My lists are no where all inclusive.

Social justice and equity are man conceived concepts. Their advocates require the rest of humanity to deny their individuality in the vain belief that a perfect condition can be achieved and maintained by the members of an infinitely, individually unique, yet universally imperfect humanity.

1 Like

Yet government is not some unique species of immortal, perfected, divine being. Its simply a gathering of imperfect humans, momentarily exercising power over other imperfect humans at a specific place and time.

1 Like

Why on earth would we want to. Competition can bring out the best in people.


If each of us were a race car, prior to graduating, our job is to make sure the fuel system is perfect, the tires are ready, the engine has all cylinders firing, the exhaust system is free flowing, every aspect regarding the performance of this car is ready to go and then on high school graduation day, the light turns green and “we” are off.

All of us have the opportunity prior to that day to prepare. The teachers all have degrees in teaching. The buildings are heated and airconditioned. We all have access to prepare our cars to the Z-factor but the question becomes because it takes years, lots of effort, many sacrifices from things you’d rather do and a commitment of your life to achieving this goal, who is willing to do it?

Not all of us make the same effort. Not all of us make an equal commitment. Not all of us make the necessary sacrifices. Along the way, instead of preparing and doing the things necessary to have the fastest car, we do other things because it’s more fun. That said, when the cars are released, it isn’t the speed of each that varies due to one car being better or more advantaged than the other, it’s the amount of time, effort and preparedness that will determine the performance level of each…and this is the same for all of life.

You show me an example of an entity that needs help and I’ll show you an entity that didn’t prepare, sacrifice and make the necessary efforts when the time was right, when the factors for all were as close to equal as they’ll ever get.

1 Like

So super common that the winners of the World Series, the Super Bowl, the US Open(s), the Stanley Cup, the NBA finals, the Scripps Spelling Bee, all the elections, the board seats, the chief or primetime slots, the first chairs, the lead anchors, the CEO, CSO, CFO and COO chairs, the heads of departments, the Michelin chefs, and all the other first ranks are chosen by wispy feelings and plebiscite…

1 Like

No. I am talking mainly socially.

Those have an economic component (most) because to get there you have to have fundraising. That said, fundraising donations will depend on persuasion, which is social psychology.

There is a slight difference between sociology and psychology.