One set of convictions that I ascribe to dearly is that of egalitarianism. I strongly believe in the right of all human beings to live a life of equal opportunity, and that this should be the end goal of humanity’s progress. While many pay lip service to the idea of egalitarianism, there are a frightening number of people in this country with an “I’ve got mine” attitude, who are simply unafraid to allow others to suffer for their own gain. I have dwelled on this topic a lot as of late, especially as I picked up Upton Sinclair’s The Jungle for the first time.
As an egalitarian, the first and strongest conviction I hold is that everybody should be entitled to the same opportunities. Whether or not they take these opportunities is entirely up to them, but it is the duty of the collective to provide said opportunities for every one of its members. While this can be difficult to achieve, and it may require some sacrifice on the part of the individual, it is ultimately the end goal -the sort of stasis- that egalitarianism is marching towards.
The second tenant of this belief is altruism, which is the necessity to do right by others for no gain (or perhaps even some loss) of your own. Altruism has been espoused throughout history by many major figures, and is a core component of most major religions, yet how it is practiced, and to what degree, is often up for debate. I believe that any action that can be taken to benefit somebody else with no expense to the self should be taken in every instance, and that actions in which someone else benefits while the self suffers can be taken, but only to a certain degree. To donate $5 to a homeless individual is a good act of altruism, but to donate your entire house goes above and beyond and can even be harmful, because it impedes the ability of the self to practice altruism in the future. It is hard to give when you have nothing, so therefore you cannot give everything, or you will not longer have anything to give.
That brings me to my next tenant: liberty. Many people believe liberty and egalitarianism to be mutually exclusive, but this is not the case. Even the motto of the French Republic, “Liberty, Equality, and Brotherhood”, disregards that exclusivity. In truth, liberty is a basic part of egalitarianism. The goal of egalitarianism is to improve conditions for the entire collective. Liberty is one way of doing this. By insuring certain rights to all individuals, you can strengthen the collective. Things such as free speech are beneficial to the collective as a whole, and so they can be practiced alongside egalitarianism.
Another tenant that is often viewed as contradictory is freedom. Many believe that egalitarianism, and the political models that follow it, require the relinquishment of certain rights to benefit the collective, but the simple truth is, that which harms the individual often harms the collective, and that which benefits the individual often benefits the collective. Freedom of choice, when extended to all parties, is almost essential to a proper understanding of egalitarianism. A good example of this is with universities. As an egalitarian, I believe higher education should be a choice made by the individual, not forced upon them. It is a choice that will be provided to every single individual, but going back to tenant #1, it is still up to the individual to choose to take that opportunity. It should never be out of reach for the individual, nor do I believe it should cost one individual more than another. Only then can we consider the choice to be truly free.
The driving force of egalitarianism is empathy, which is the central emotion of the belief. I always found it strange that being called a “bleeding heart” was an insult in America. How dare somebody care about the lives of others! It seems entirely irrational to eschew empathy from one’s life. After all, it is the main emotion that separates human beings from mere beasts. A lion feels no remorse for its prey, and generally only thinks about itself and its own survival. Empathy seeks to rectify this by allowing us to understand the plight of others.
The final tenant is that of tolerance. Quite simply, egalitarianism cannot co-exist with bigotry and prejudice. One must learn to be tolerant of others, and to be understanding of their position. If a man commits a heinous act, the primary response should not be vengeance, but understanding. One must find out what drove the man to such an act, what qualities in life and what position preceded such an event, and then seek to resolve them and improve upon them. Human beings, at their core, are selfish. It is an innate survival technique. Things such as altruism only harm the individual’s chances of survival in the natural environment, so instead nature makes man inclined to selfishness. This must be remembered, always, if one wants to understand how to move beyond it. Egalitarianism is about moving beyond our innate desire for selfishness and learning to see others are human beings who are equally deserving of a good life.
This I believe.
The Blog of Heroes 