Equality

I support the view that most inequalities which we notice around us are created by society.

Reasons:

• Social Construction of Value: While natural differences exist (e.g., one person is stronger, another is more artistic), these only become “inequalities” when society values one trait more than the other. For example, manual labor is often valued less than mental labor, leading to wage gaps. This valuation is social, not natural.
• Historical Injustice: Major forms of inequality like caste, race, and gender discrimination are entirely human-made constructs designed to exploit certain groups. They have no basis in nature.
• Rousseau’s Distinction: Jean-Jacques Rousseau famously distinguished between ‘Natural Inequality’ (age, health) and ‘Social/Political Inequality’ (wealth, power). The latter is established by human convention.

Yes, I agree.

Why it is not possible/desirable:

• Incentive: If everyone receives exactly the same income regardless of effort or skill, people may lose the incentive to work hard or innovate.
• Practicality: Different professions have different needs and risks.

The Goal: The goal of a just society should not be absolute uniformity, but:

• Reducing the massive gap between the rich and the poor.
• Ensuring a basic minimum standard of living (food, shelter, education) for everyone.
• Ensuring Equality of Opportunity, so that wealth is a result of effort, not inheritance or privilege.

Concept	Instance
(a) Affirmative action	(ii) Banks offer higher rate of interest to senior citizens. (Special treatment for a disadvantaged/vulnerable group).
(b) Equality of opportunity	(iii) Every child should get free education. (Ensuring everyone starts from the same line).
(c) Equal Rights	(i) Every adult citizen has a right to vote. (Political equality).

Yes, this is consistent with the principle of equality.
This is an example of Substantive Equality (or Equity), which operates on the principle: “Treat equals equally, and unequals differently.”
Small and marginal farmers are not in the same position as large, wealthy farmers. They lack resources, bargaining power, and resilience against market shocks. To treat them “equally” (i.e., giving them no extra help) would actually reinforce their disadvantage. Therefore, affirmative state intervention to level the playing field is a requirement of justice.

• (a) Every child reads text by turn: No Violation. This ensures equality of opportunity for participation.
• (b) Canada encouraged white Europeans to migrate: Violation. This is discrimination based on race/color. It treats individuals differently based on birth, violating the principle of human equality.
• (c) Separate counter for senior citizens: No Violation. This is Affirmative Action. It acknowledges the physical limitations of the elderly and provides differential treatment to ensure they can access the service equally.
• (d) Forest access reserved for tribal communities: No Violation. This protects the specific cultural and economic rights of a marginalized community. It ensures their survival against encroachment by outsiders.

[Image of equality vs equity illustration]

• (b) Consistent: “Decisions of the government affect women as well as men…” This aligns with the democratic principle that those subject to laws must have a voice in making them.
• (d) Consistent: “Women constitute half of humanity…” This appeals to the principle of equal worth and number. You cannot disenfranchise 50% of the population and claim equality.
• (a) Inconsistent: “Women are our mothers…” This restricts women’s identity to a familial role (motherhood) rather than recognizing them as independent citizens with equal rights. It is a patriarchal argument, even if well-meaning.
• (c) Inconsistent: “Disharmony in the family…” This is a utilitarian argument about social order, not a rights-based argument about equality.