Egalitarianism: Difference between revisions

'''Egalitarianism''' ({{ety|fr|égal|equal}}; also '''equalitarianism''') is a [[school of thought]] within political philosophy that builds on the concept of [[social equality]], prioritizing it for all people.<ref>{{dictionary.com |egalitarian |access-date=7 May 2018}}</ref> Egalitarian doctrines are generally characterized by the idea that all humans are equal in fundamental worth or moral status.<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/egalitarianism |title=Egalitarianism |encyclopedia=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |year=2019 |department=Metaphysics Research Lab |publisher=Stanford University}}</ref> As such, all people should be accorded [[Equal rights before the law|equal rights]] and [[Equality before the law|treatment under the law]].<ref>{{Cite book|last=Robertson|first=David|title=The Routledge Dictionary of Politics|publisher=Routledge Taylor and Francis Group|year=2007|isbn=978-0-415-32377-2|page=159}}</ref><ref>{{cite encyclopedia |title=Egalitarianism |dictionary=Merriam-Webster Dictionary |url=http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/egalitarianism |date=7 June 2023}}</ref> Egalitarian doctrines have supported many modern social movements, including the [[Age of Enlightenment|Enlightenment]], [[feminism]], [[civil rights]], and [[International human rights law|international human rights]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=Egalitarianism |url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/egalitarianism |access-date=2022-10-06 |website=[[Encyclopædia Britannica]] |language=en}}</ref> Egalitarianism is the foundation of [[left-wing politics]].<ref name="Smith">{{cite book|author-last1=Smith |author-first1=T. Alexander |author-first2=Raymond |author-last2=Tatalovich |title=Cultures at War: Moral Conflicts in Western Democracies |url=https://archive.org/details/culturesatwarmor0000smit |url-access=registration |location=Toronto, Canada |publisher=Broadview Press |year=2003 |page=[https://archive.org/details/culturesatwarmor0000smit/page/30 30] |isbn=9781551113340}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author-last1=Bobbio |author-first1=Norberto |author-first2=Allan |author-last2=Cameron |title=Left and Right: The Significance of a Political Distinction |url=https://archive.org/details/leftrightsignifi00bobb |url-access=limited |publisher=[[University of Chicago Press]] |year=1997 |page=[https://archive.org/details/leftrightsignifi00bobb/page/n58 37]}}</ref><ref name="Lukes">{{cite book|author-last1=Ball |author-first1=Terence |title=The Cambridge History of Twentieth-Century Political Thought |date=2005 |publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] |location=Cambridge |isbn=9780521563543 |edition=Reprint. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=N1h4_NqTOFoC&q=The+Cambridge+History+of+Twentieth-Century+Political+Thought |access-date=15 November 2016 |pages=612–614}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author-last1=Thompson |author-first1=Willie |title=The Left In History: Revolution and Reform in Twentieth-Century Politic |date=1997 |publisher=[[Pluto Press]] |location=London |isbn=978-0745308913}}</ref>

The [[Declaration of Independence of the United States]] is an example of an assertion of equality of men as "[[All men are created equal]]" and the wording of men and man is a reference to both men and women, i.e., mankind. [[John Locke]] is sometimes considered the founder of this form.<ref>{{Citation |last=Tuckness |first=Alex |title=Locke's Political Philosophy |date=2024 |encyclopedia=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |editor-last=Zalta |editor-first=Edward N. |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke-political/ |access-date=2025-03-05 |edition=Summer 2024 |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |editor2-last=Nodelman |editor2-first=Uri}}</ref> Many state constitutions in the United States also use the rights of man language rather than rights of person{{Citation needed|date=July 2023}} since the noun man has always been a reference to and an inclusion of both men and women.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Rauer |first1=Christine |year=2017 |title=Mann and Gender in Old English Prose: A Pilot Study |url=https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11061-016-9489-1.pdf |journal=Neophilologus |volume=101 |pages=139–158 |doi=10.1007/s11061-016-9489-1 |s2cid=55817181 |hdl-access=free |hdl=10023/8978}}</ref>

[[Feminism]] is informed by egalitarian philosophy, being a gender-focused philosophy of equality. Feminism is distinguished from egalitarianism by also existing as a political and social movement.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Fiss|first=Owen|date=1994|title=What is feminism|journal=Arizona State Law Journal|volume=26|pages=413–428|via=HeinOnline}}</ref>

At a cultural level, egalitarian theories have developed in sophistication and acceptance during the past two hundred years. Among the notable broadly egalitarian philosophies are [[socialism]], [[communism]], [[social anarchism]], [[libertarian socialism]], [[left-libertarianism]], and [[progressivism]], some of which propound [[economic egalitarianism]]. Anti-egalitarianism<ref>{{cite journal |author1=Sidanius, Jim |display-authors=etal |title=Social dominance orientation, anti-egalitarianism and the political psychology of gender: An extension and cross-cultural replication |journal=European Journal of Social Psychology |volume=30 |issue=1 |year=2000 |pages=41–67 |doi=10.1002/(sici)1099-0992(200001/02)30:1<41::aid-ejsp976>3.0.co;2-o}}</ref> or [[elitism]]<ref>{{cite web |url=http://englishthesaurus.net/antonym/egalitarian/ |title=Antonyms for egalitarian |website=English Thesaurus |access-date=28 September 2018}}</ref> is opposition to egalitarianism.

=== Suffering-focused ethics ===

Some proponents of suffering-focused ethics argue that egalitarianism naturally supports a moral focus on reducing suffering. Because egalitarianism prioritizes the interests of those who are worse off in morally relevant terms, and since those experiencing the greatest suffering typically fall into that category, it follows that egalitarians should give special priority to reducing the suffering of the worst-off individuals. This interpretation has been used to argue that egalitarian commitments can justify strong moral concern for alleviating extreme suffering.<ref>{{cite book |last=Vinding |first=Magnus |title=Suffering-Focused Ethics: Defense and Implications |publisher=Center for Reducing Suffering |year=2020 |chapter=Egalitarianism and Prioritarianism }}</ref>

The verse [[Al-Hujurat|49]]:13 of The [[Quran]] states: "O mankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another. Indeed, the noblest of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you. Indeed, Allah is Knowing and Acquainted".<ref>{{cite web |title=The Quranic Arabic Corpus – Translation |url=http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=49&verse=13 |website=corpus.quran.com |access-date=30 December 2019}}</ref> [[Muhammad]] echoed these egalitarian sentiments, sentiments that clashed with the practices of the pre-Islamic cultures.{{Citation needed|date=July 2023}} In a review of Louise Marlow's ''Hierarchy and Egalitarianism in Islamic Thought,'' [[Ismail Poonawala]] argues the desire for the Arab-Muslim Empire to consolidate power and administer the state rather led to the deemphasis of egalitarian teachings in the Qur'an and by the Prophet.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Poonawala |first1=Ismail |author-link1=Ismail Poonawala |title=Reviewed Work: Hierarchy and Egalitarianism in Islamic Thought by Louise Marlow |journal=Iranian Studies |date=Summer 1999 |volume=32 |issue=3 |pages=405–407 |doi=10.1017/S0021086200002759 |jstor=4311272 |s2cid=245659108 }}</ref>. Other verses indicate that only muslims are eligible for this equality, e.g. Surah 98:6 "Indeed, they who disbelieved among the People of the Scripture and the polytheists will be in the fire of Hell, abiding eternally therein. Those are the worst of creatures."

Thompson et al. theorize that any society consisting of only one perspective, be it egalitarianism, hierarchies, [[individualist]], [[fatalist]] or [[Autonomy|autonomists]] will be inherently unstable as the claim is that an interplay between all these perspectives are required if each perspective is to be fulfilling. Although an individualist according to cultural theory is aversive towards both principles and groups, individualism is not fulfilling if individual brilliance cannot be recognized by groups, or if individual brilliance cannot be made permanent in the form of principles.<ref name="Thompson 1990">{{cite book |last1=Thompson |first1=Michael |url=https://archive.org/details/culturaltheory0000thom |title=Cultural Theory |last2=Ellis |first2=Richard |last3=Wildavsky |first3=Aaron |publisher=[[Routledge]] |year=1990 |isbn=9780813378640 |series=Political Cultures |url-access=registration}}</ref>{{Rp|page=121}} Accordingly, they argue that egalitarians have no power except through their presence, unless they (by definition, reluctantly) embrace principles which enable them to cooperate with fatalists and hierarchies. They argue that this means they will also have no individual sense of direction without a group, which could be mitigated by following individuals outside their group, namely autonomists or individualists. [[Alexander Berkman]] suggests that "equality does not mean an equal amount but equal opportunity. ... Do not make the mistake of identifying equality in liberty with the forced equality of the convict camp. True anarchist equality implies freedom, not quantity. It does not mean that everyone must eat, drink, or wear the same things, do the same work, or live in the same manner. Far from it: the very reverse. ... Individual needs and tastes differ, as appetites differ. It is an equal opportunity to satisfy them that constitutes true equality. ... Far from leveling, such equality opens the door for the greatest possible variety of activity and development. For human character is diverse."<ref>{{cite book |last=Berkman |first=Alexander |title=What is Anarchism? |publisher=[[AK Press]] |year=2003 |isbn=1-902593-70-7 |pages=164–165}}</ref>

In the title essay of his book ''[[Egalitarianism as a Revolt Against Nature and Other Essays]]'', [[Murray Rothbard]] argued that egalitarian theory always results in a politics of statist control because it is founded on revolt against the ontological structure of reality itself.<ref name="Rothbard">{{cite book |last1=Rothbard |first1=Murray N. |url=https://mises.org/library/egalitarianism-revolt-against-nature-and-other-essays |title=Egalitarianism as a revolt against nature, and other essays |publisher=[[Ludwig von Mises Institute]] |year=2000 |isbn=0-945466-23-4 |edition=2nd |location=Auburn, Ala. |access-date=17 February 2023 |orig-date=1974}}</ref> According to Rothbard, individuals are naturally unequal in their abilities, talents, and characteristics. He believed that this inequality was not only natural but necessary for a functioning society. In his view, people's unique qualities and abilities are what allow them to contribute to society in different ways.<ref name="Rothbard" />

* [[Feminism]]

* [[One man, one vote]]