structure for 'Social Practice'    |     alphabetical list of themes    |     unexpand these ideas

25. Social Practice / B. Equalities / 2. Political equality

[equality of involvement in running society]

16 ideas
It is dreadful to neither give a share nor receive a share [Aristotle]
     Full Idea: Neither to give a share nor to receive a share is a fearful thing.
     From: Aristotle (Politics [c.332 BCE], 1281b28)
     A reaction: It is striking that he includes equality in giving, as well as in receiving. Paying taxes is a privilege, because it shows your equality as a citizen.
Faction is for inferiors to be equal, and equals to become superior [Aristotle]
     Full Idea: Inferiors engage in faction in order to be equal, while equals do so in order to be superior.
     From: Aristotle (Politics [c.332 BCE], 1302a30)
     A reaction: In Britain that seems to trade unions in the first case, and the Conservative Party in the second case. Aristotle dislikes faction, but he's stuck with it because he insists on freedom.
The Heraeans replaced election with lot, to thwart campaigning [Aristotle]
     Full Idea: The people of Heraea replaced election with selection by lot because those who electioneered were getting elected.
     From: Aristotle (Politics [c.332 BCE], 1303a14)
     A reaction: Maybe electioneering can distort sensible choices, but good choices need good knowledge of the candidates. It is much harder in large communities.
Democracy is corrupted by lack of equality, or by extreme equality (between rulers and ruled) [Montesquieu]
     Full Idea: Democracy is corrupted in two ways: when it loses the spirit of equality, and when the spirit of equality becomes extreme, that is, when everyone wishes to be the equal of those he has chosen to command him.
     From: Baron de Montesquieu (The Spirit of the Laws (rev. 1757) [1748], 08.02)
     A reaction: The latter seems to be what happens when a referendum is called (as in Brexit 2016). The winners come to despise the elected representatives, if the latter disagree with the outcome.
All citizens are eligible for roles in the state, purely on the basis of merit [Mirabeau/committee]
     Full Idea: All citizens being equal in the eyes of the law are equally eligible to all honours, offices, and public employments, according to their abilities and without other distinction than that of their virtues and talents.
     From: Mirabeau and committee (Declaration of the Rights of Man [1789], 06)
     A reaction: This proclamation of meritocracy must have rung bells around the cities of Europe, and was a reason why many people enjoyed being invaded by Napoleon.
Equality can only be established by equal rights for all (or no rights for anyone) [Tocqueville]
     Full Idea: I know of only two methods of establishing equality in the political world; rights must be given to every citizen, or none at all to anyone.
     From: Alexis de Tocqueville (Democracy in America (abr Renshaw) [1840], 1.02)
     A reaction: We may have a vague concept of 'natural' rights, but primarily they are a tool of social engineering. You could grant equal rights on inheritance, for example, which turn out in practice to hugely favour the rich.
In modern society virtue is 'equal rights', but only because everyone is zero, so it is a sum of zeroes [Nietzsche]
     Full Idea: Our entire sociology simply does not know any other instinct than that of the herd, i.e. that of the sum of zeroes - where every zero has "equal rights", where it is virtuous to be zero.
     From: Friedrich Nietzsche (The Will to Power (notebooks) [1888], §053)
     A reaction: I see his point, but all social arrangements are a trade-off. It would be quite exciting if warlike aristocrats dragged us into massive conquest, but nuclear weapons seem to have ruined that game.
Perfect political equality requires economic equality [Gramsci]
     Full Idea: The idea that complete and perfect political equality cannot exist without economic equality ...remains correct.
     From: Antonio Gramsci (Selections from Prison Notebooks [1971], 2 'The State')
     A reaction: In the west we are living in a period (2018) when the top 0.1% of the wealthy are racing away, creating huge inequality. Their wealth controls the media, and it seems unrestrainable. The belief that we live in a 'democracy' is an illusion.
Political involvement is needed, to challenge existing practices [Habermas, by Kymlicka]
     Full Idea: Habermas thinks political deliberation is required precisely because in its absence people will tend to accept existing practices as given, and thereby perpetuate false needs.
     From: report of Jürgen Habermas (The Theory of Communicative Action [1981]) by Will Kymlicka - Community 'need'
     A reaction: If the dream is healthy and intelligent progress, it is not clear where that should come from. The problem with state involvement in the authority and power of the state. Locals are often prejudiced, so the intermediate level may be best.
Democracy is opposed to equality, if the poor are not a majority [Nagel]
     Full Idea: As things are, democracy is the enemy of comprehensive equality, once the poor cease to be a majority.
     From: Thomas Nagel (Equality and Partiality [1991], Ch.9)
     A reaction: This is obvious once you think about it, but it is well worth saying, because it is tempting to think that we live in an 'equal' society, merely because we are equal in things such as voting rights and equality before the law.
Equality nowadays is seen as political, social, legal and economic [Nagel]
     Full Idea: Contemporary political debate recognises four types of equality: political, social, legal and economic.
     From: Thomas Nagel (Equality [1977], §1)
     A reaction: Meaning equality of 1) power and influence, 2) status and respect, 3) rights and justice, 4) wealth.
Equality can either be defended as good for society, or as good for individual rights [Nagel]
     Full Idea: The communitarian defence of equality says it is good for society as a whole, whereas the individualistic defence defends equality as a correct distributive principle.
     From: Thomas Nagel (Equality [1977], §2)
Complex equality restricts equalities from spilling over, like money influencing politics and law [Walzer, by Tuckness/Wolf]
     Full Idea: Complex equality tries to keep advantages in one area (such as money) from translating into advantages in politics or before the law.
     From: report of Michael Walzer (Spheres of Justice [1983]) by Tuckness,A/Wolf,C - This is Political Philosophy 3 'Complex'
     A reaction: Put like that, Walzer's complex equality becomes very interesting, and pinpoints a major problem of our age, where discrepancies of wealth have become staggeringly large at the top end.
Equal opportunities seems fair, because your fate is from your choices, not your circumstances [Kymlicka]
     Full Idea: The ideology of equal opportunity seems fair to many people in our society because it ensures that people's fate is determined by their choices, rather than their circumstances.
     From: Will Kymlicka (Contemporary Political Philosophy (1st edn) [1990], 3.2)
     A reaction: Is it that we surmise that people have 'free will', and then engineer a situation where it can be exercised? Is it that the rest of us don't want to feel guilty when someone else's life goes awry (because it was 'their fault')?
Equal opportunity arbitrarily worries about social circumstances, but ignores talents [Kymlicka]
     Full Idea: The prevailing view [of equal opportunity] only recognises differences in social circumstances, while ignoring differences in natural talents (or treating them as if they were a choice). This is an arbitrary limit on the theory's central intuition.
     From: Will Kymlicka (Contemporary Political Philosophy (1st edn) [1990], 3.2)
     A reaction: Of course we (society) can do a lot about your social circumstances, but very little about your talents, other than to develop them or thwart them. Talented children need more than mere 'opportunity'.
Political equality is not much use without social equality [Wolff,J]
     Full Idea: As Marx observed, and as women have learnt to their cost, equal political rights are worth fighting for, but they are of little value if one is still treated unequally in day-to-day life.
     From: Jonathan Wolff (An Introduction to Political Philosophy (Rev) [2006], 3 'Participatory')
     A reaction: In fact social equality comes first, because that will imply political equality and financial justice. I think it is all covered under the virtue of 'respect', which should have pre-eminence in both public and private life.