Why is Everyone Equal?

I have found myself feeling under immense pressure recently to conform to the opinion that everyone in the world is equal; everyone is entitled to the same equal freedoms and liberties. Moreover, this should be adopted by taking a conciliatory and accepting attitude toward everybody as espoused by Messrs. Leibniz, Montesque, Dallmayr and more. It seems that the misinformed, wrong and, frankly, abhorrent beliefs of previous eras which discriminated people according to skin colour and nationality have brought about kneejerk reactions and forced people to be just as extreme in the other direction. We now are promoting an artificial construction of equality when one doesnt exist. Let it be known first and foremost that I dont believe that people are different according to any or all of the following criteria: skin colour, sex, nationality, race, language or age. With these I strongly disagree for it is a scientifically provable fact that we are all homo-sapiens. Regardless if someone is a young, Caucasian female from French-speaking Switzerland or an old, Japanese male from the Saga-Ken prefecture in Japan, the thing that joins them is their belonging to the same species. They are both humans. However, whilst 4 and 5 are both numbers, it would be wrong of us to say that they are equal. Just as Saturn Devouring his Son by Goya and the drawing of a tree attached to my fridge by my niece are both pictures, they too are very different. If one were to pick up a copy of Shakespeares Hamlet and then, having read that, pick up a copy of the contemporary Twilight series, would it be fair to say that they were equal? When a farmer

goes to a livestock auction, does he bid the same amount for a proud stallion as he does for a morose looking horse? When people look to adopt a pet, perhaps a dog or a cat, do they say that any one will do? If we were asked to compare two pieces of music would we say that the latest pop ballad is equal to Tchaikovskys Swan Lake? The answer to these is clearly a negative one but how does that help us solve the main problem in our investigation? Hopefully, the above examples are beginning to show that simply belonging to the same genus does not immediately make us equal. What does then, in some peoples eyes, make us equal? How do people justify the idea that everyone on the planet is equal? Why should I understand or believe everyone to be equal? Some might say that everybody is equal before the lawbut the law is an artificial human construct. Our legal system is not something that occurs or happens naturally . In nature, for example, there is clearly not equality. There is a distinct hierarchy that exists between the animals in a certain species: alpha males dominate others and queens organise hives. Law is used by us to create an equality that doesnt exist naturally. It is used to make us more civilized. This is clearly done with the very best of intentions by, one would assume, the most noble of men. In China, as an example only as one could use any legal system for the purpose of this demonstration, legalism ()was first advocated by Shang Yang () in the Fourth Century BC. When Shang Yang began to try and reform society according to the rule of law he was doing something that very few people at the time could have done. This is not to say that I agree with him in fact on a very fundamental level I disagree with him and his assertion that all humans are fundamentally flawed but rather to show that he

was doing something that very few other people could have done at that time. He was a step above/beyond/parallel from the rest of the entire population. Similarly, if we were to look at a pivotal figure from the Occident in Classical times be it Socrates, Plato or Aristotle would we say that they were equal to the rest of the Ancient Grecian population? Some people stood out from the others and used their ability to try and create something, be it a legal system, a philosophical outlook or art. Therefore, law attempts to create a system in which all men are equal before it but it does not necessarily mean that all men are therefore equal. I have heard from others that everybody is equal before God. I will not deal here with any of the monotheistic religions for they have little to no validity in the presence of modern rational discourse. We have, hopefully, learnt from our more pagan past and moved beyond imagining the thunder and lightning as evidence for an omnipotent being. A better argument is found in the forms of monism espoused by strands of Hinduism and Buddhism Atman is Braham - but this brings us back to the idea that we are all life. Yes, we are all life. We can follow the biological distinction back through the classification table to say that the species is below the genus, the genus below the family, the family below the order, the order below the class, the class below the phylum, the phylum below the kingdom, the kingdom below the domain and the domain is, finally, under life. To say we are all life however does not make us equal. Contemporary examples of the idea of equality being an artificial human construct could include no child left behind policies in education, democratic voting in giving the same voice to a doctor of politics as to a self-confessed xenophobe, plastic surgery allowing us all

to be beautiful and medicine and treatments elongating life providing us the means to live to a more average and equal age. By advocating equality, we take away weakness. By taking away weakness, however, we are also taking away strength. By leaving no child behind we are not pushing other children forward, by allowing two people the same voice in serious matters we are undermining the study and diligent application one has put in to achieve a reasoned-position, by promoting plastic surgery we are diminishing the aspect of natural beauty that some possess while medicines and treatments mean people can live lives without any consideration for their health. Does it not seem we are striving to achieve a society although deemed civil that is bland and mundane, that is devoid of greatness by removing inferiority? If everyone is equal, from where will the next classics appear? The most fundamental question that I am posing, however, is on what grounds do we justify everyone being equal? If there is an answer to this, I would surely love to know it and become more equal.