|EQUALITY:an unrealisable ideal condition that induces pragmatic indifference.
'Equality' and 'identicality' are not to be confused.
The first is an unrealisable ideal condition whereby two quantities are supposed to have exactly the same value,
whilst the second is a matter of different labels being used in time and space for the same entity.
[In mathematics... the immaculate realm of the ideal... although a distinction is made between the two,
the practical manipulative consequences are of little significance.
Thus I(x,y)≡ x2 - y2 = x.x - y.y = (x+y).(x-y) is designated as an 'identity' because it is true
for all possible values of x and y, whereas the supposition of the 'equality' between two expressions expressed as the equation
2x2-3x-4 = x2-2x-2, implies by relentless logic the fact that x can only have a value of -1 or 2. ]
In the real world, 'identicality' should be the word that is used to describe those situations where a single entity
has more than one label, as in the case of 'the morning star' and 'the evening star' being identical because they are
different names for the planet 'Venus'.
Considering twins to be 'identical'... because no-one can discover a discriminating characteristic... overlooks the fact
that they are distinguishable in time and space.
The one on the left is a different space-time entity from the one on the right.
Outside of mathematics, 'equality' can be an almost impossible state to certify.
Small sets of counted objects... like pumpkins, coins, siblings, cattle etc...
might be able to be compared and pronounced as being equal if none of those doing the counting
are of a disputative frame of mind and all lawyers and experts were excluded from the exercise.
Once the sets become larger in magnitude, the objects are defined by laws or vested interest, and different counting strategies are adopted,
the probability of different counts ending up being numerically equal is practically zero.
Published values of the numbers claimed to have attended political protest meeting will never agree.
Measured quantities...like heights, energy outputs, weights, etc. are never equal.
They are existentially constrained by technology levels and must be qualified by admissions of errors in making the measurements.
Social equality has been aspired to from many suggested perspectives, but as inspiring and motivational a banner as it has sometimes been,
implementation of such an ideal is a practical impossibility.
The most pragmatic democratic objective is to establish a broad base of rights that are conferred on all citizens.
Thus all citizens... whatever their age or abilities... should have an officially recognized set of 'natural' rights which must
include the right to life, and the right to be free from any form of subjugation or deprivation of the essentials of living.
'Equality' of all members of a society is only relevant with respect to this core set of rights.
Other rights are established for different sectors of a society depending upon the political and administrative inclinations of that society.
Equalities of 'opportunity', 'civil rights', 'military obligation', 'education', etc are all determined
according to the internal social political pressure groups that strive to promote the agendas that suit themselves.
The rights to drive, vote and marry are conferred on those possessing what are deemed appropriate qualifications.
The rights to arrest other citizens are conferred on certain of the policing sectors.
Very rare and unique rights may be given to royalty, presidents and executioners.
Clearly any aspiration to some sort of 'universal' equality of rights is a social absurdity.
A powerful and ever-present tension exists however, because certain individuals and groups
have evolved to try and advantage themselves.
They continually promote their cause by ensuring general inequalities whereby they are advantaged
with respect to the resources, and the remainder of the society are subjugated.
Slaves, serfs, tenant farmers, factory workers, labourers, miners etc have often been the social groups that have
been exploited and denied basic human considerations.
Individuals, in point of fact, are never born equal, and they will always vary widely as to their capacity
to undertake any of the various social roles.
A hierarchical structure will develop according to the group survival importance of the roles,
and privilege will thereby be reinforced and consolidated.
So it is that birth and nurture circumstances will have an intrinsic and powerful influence on individual attitudes
to the social structure.
The source of so-called 'left-right' socio-political inclination thus will have its origins
in the very society-forming process itself.
The possession of privilege and property most frequently arises out of historical social role dominance,
so that the individual 'right-wing' political perspective inclines to perpetuate that circumstance.
Lack of privilege and property is the source of the 'left-wing' individual resentment
which inclines to rectify the imbalance.
The left-right birth-nurture spectrum is always in the sociological make-up of any individual,
and the multifarious other social groupings of religion,
politics, ethnicity, etc all have
it as an intrinsic substratum of their social and political attitudes.