From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The United States Declaration of Independence subverted the dominant social doctrine of the time, the Divine Right of Kings, by saying "All men are created equal"

Egalitarianism (derived from the French word égal, meaning "equal") has two distinct definitions in modern English.[1] It is defined either as a political doctrine that holds that all people should be treated as equals and have the same political, economic, social, and civil rights[2] or as a social philosophy advocating the removal of economic inequalities among people.

In cultures including modern ones, people tend to be divided into upper and lower classes. However, before the agricultural revolution, humanity existed in primarily hunter-gatherer societies that, some believe, were at least largely egalitarian. It is considered by some to be the natural state of society.[3][4][5]

Social inequality has been suggested to be the cause of many social problems. A comprehensive study of major world economies could be interpreted that homicide, infant mortality, obesity, teenage pregnancies, emotional depression and prison population all correlate with higher social inequality.[6]

Egalitarianism is a subject of concern politically, philosophically, and religiously.



[edit] Forms

Some specifically focused egalitarian concerns include economic egalitarianism, legal egalitarianism, luck egalitarianism, political egalitarianism, gender egalitarianism, racial equality, asset-based egalitarianism, and Christian egalitarianism. Common forms of egalitarianism include political, philosophical, and religious.

[edit] Political

The framers of various modern governments made references to the Enlightenment principles of egalitarianism, "inalienable rights endowed by their Creator," in the moral principles by which they lived, and which formed the basis for their legacy.

[edit] Philosophical

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, anarchism, left-libertarianism, and progressivism, all of which propound economic, political, and legal egalitarianism, respectively. Several egalitarian ideas enjoy wide support among intellectuals and in the general populations of many countries. Whether any of these ideas have been significantly implemented in practice, however, remains a controversial question.

One argument is that liberalism provides democracy with the experience of civic reformism. Without it, democracy loses any tie─argumentative or practical─to a coherent design of public policy endeavoring to provide the resources for the realization of democratic citizenship. For instance, some argue that modern representative democracy is a realization of political egalitarianism, while others believe that, in reality, most political power still resides in the hands of a ruling class, rather than in the hands of the people.[7]

[edit] Religious

[edit] In Christianity

The Christian egalitarian view holds that the Bible teaches the fundamental equality of women and men of all racial and ethnic mixes, all economic classes, and all age groups, based on the teachings and example of Jesus Christ and the overarching principles of scripture.

[edit] In Islam

Islam is widely regarded as an egalitarian religion which has a record of equality regardless of race, birth, color. Islam also repudiates vulgar forms of nationalism that artificially aggrandize one's own people over others on no moral basis. Dr. Mohammad Omar Farooq says that "Various demarcations of people based on groups, tribes, ethnicities or nationalities are quite alright, as it is natural for the humanity as a social entity. However, that is primarily to know each other in terms of our lineage, not to aggrandize oneself. Islam further reinforces this universality on the basis of not a man (Adam), but a man and a woman (Adam and Eve) and educates us that there is no virtue based on race, color, language, geographical location, wealth, or gender." [8]

According to Pulitzer Prize-winning authors Nicholas Kristof and Sheryl WuDunn,[9] Islam is not misogynistic. Muhammad's introduction of Islam in the seventh century is seen by some[who?] as a step forward for women, although modern society widely regards Islam as a religion that oppresses women[10]

[edit] Studies

A study published in 2009 took into account data sets from major world economies and correlated them with inequality indices. The study found that the absolute wealth within a country had little effect on the citizens' wellbeing or social cohesion, and that inequality correlated strongly with social problems such as homicide, infant mortality, obesity, teenage pregnancies, emotional depression and prison population. For example, countries such as Japan, Finland and Norway scored highly in social well-being and equality indices, while countries such as the United States and United Kingdom scored low in both.[6]

A study of American college students published in Nature showed that people are willing to pay to reduce inequality.[11] When subjects were placed into groups and given random amounts of income, they spent their own money to reduce the incomes of the highest earners and increase the incomes of the lowest earners.[12][13] Critics argued that no experiments have been made on working adults whereupon they might not be generous with redistribution of their income.

In a follow-up study, Swiss children showed a significant increase in sharing between the ages of 3 and 8. It has not been determined whether the results of either of these experiments are due to an innate instinct, or exposure to and adoption of the customs of other people.[14]

[edit] Support and criticism

A society that meets the meritocratic goal of equal opportunity might still be a harsh environment for those who lack the physical, mental or social capabilities to compete. The extent to which a genuine meritocratic society is possible in the real world is debatable.[15]

[edit] See also

[edit] References

  1. ^
  2. ^ The American Heritage Dictionary (2003). "egalitarianism". 
  3. ^ John Gowdy (1998). Limited Wants, Unlimited Means: A reader on Hunter-Gatherer Economics and the Environment. St Louis: Island Press. pp. 342. ISBN 155963555X. 
  4. ^ Dahlberg, Frances. (1975). Woman the Gatherer. London: Yale university press. ISBN 0-30-02989-6.,M1. 
  5. ^ Erdal, D. & Whiten, A. (1996) "Egalitarianism and Machiavellian Intelligence in Human Evolution" in Mellars, P. & Gibson, K. (eds) Modelling the Early Human Mind. Cambridge MacDonald Monograph Series
  6. ^ a b "Inequality: The Mother of All Evils?". London: The Guardian. Retrieved 2010-01-16. 
  7. ^ Rosales, José María. "Liberalism, Civic Reformism and Democracy." 20th World Contress on Philosophy: Political Philosophy. Web: 12 March 2010. Liberalism, Civic Reformism and Democracy
  8. ^ "Islam and Egalitarian : Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of God is (he who is) the most righteous of you". Dr. Mohammad Omar Farooq, Islamicity. Retrieved 2007-01-04. 
  9. ^ Kristof, Nicholas D. and Sheryl WuDunn.Half the Sky: Turning Oppression into Opportunity for Women Worldwide. Knopf, 2009. ISBN 978-0307267146
  10. ^ Islam's opression of women
  11. ^ Dawes, Christopher T., James H. Fowler, Tim Johnson, Richard McElreath, Oleg Smirnov (12 April 2007). "Egalitarian Motives in Humans". Nature 446 (7137): 794–796. doi:10.1038/nature05651. PMID 17429399. 
  12. ^ Highfield, Roger (12 April 2007). "The Robin Hood impulse". London: The Daily Telegraph. p. 8. Retrieved 1 May 2010. 
  13. ^ "Making the Paper: James Fowler". Nature (446,): xiii. 12 April 2007. 
  14. ^ As Kids Grow Older, Egalitarianism Honed by Jon Hamilton. All Things Considered, NPR. 27 Aug 2008.
  15. ^ John Schar (1967) "Equality of Opportunity—and Beyond"

[edit] External links

Faith (for Content):