Equality In Human Society Is Impossible

Thank you for responding, let us get straight to the rebuttals 1. "pros main argument is this: People cannot be equal because they will always seek to make something elite. PRO cites that all previous instances to achieve equality have failed, but limits the scope of "previous examples" pursuing equality to "communism." PRO cites North Korea and China as examples, and concludes that human nature precludes equality because inequality is "ingrained in our very nature." " This argument still stands, as you have neither disproved my example of North Korea and China nor my example of the fact that inequality is in fact part of human nature. To substantiate my claim I point to the last ten thousand years of human history, when farming was taken in instead of hunter gathering. Because of this an egalitarian society was made impossible, as people no longer had to rely on one another. One may ask that this has only been in the last ten thousand years when humanity has had a much larger history. Well think of it this way, as soon as people no longer were forced to rely on one another, they simply took advantage of one another. This means that the aspect of inequality as part of our nature, though it has showed up recently, still is part of our nature as we no longer have to rely on one another for survival, but can manipulate others and survive at the same time. http://www.ditext.com... Also, provide me with a nation in human history that has not had inequality, you will find this task impossible. We as a race have struggled for millenia, and have never found equality. Even if we do manage from some nearly impossible way to find equality, there will still be those born with defect, and eventually our repetition of human nature will begin anew. "Aside from none of his arguments, evidence or examples cited not actually affirming the resolution, he has in no way substantiated the claim that inequality is inherent to human nature." Perhaps you could describe yourself in what way I have failed to provide evidence to support that inequality is inevitable? "then that means that the law has facilitated a quality or state of having the same rights and social status among that society's members." You are citing the U.S. Constitution, in what way, please, has this been exercised in reality? Blacks did not have full equality until the Civil Rights Movement http://www.history.com... and Gay people still do not have the right to marry, and controversially women do not even have full rights over their own bodies. "The 14th Amendment reads: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Please then show me how this has been put into practice to prevent wealth or social status disparity in a nation where the 1% control 35% of wealth. http://www2.ucsc.edu... "I have provided one example in which equality as PRO defined it is possible, meaning that equality cannot be impossible. " The example you have provided is simply words on paper. This has no bearing on the fact that the wealthy control much more than the poor, or that their is social disparity between classes. In fact, a wealthy person will be more likely to win a judge ruling, as a wealthy person could hire a superior lawyer. The inconvenient truth we must face is that equality is a much different ideal than liberty or freedom. Finally, let me move on to back up the central ideas I supported. if there is even the tiniest, most minuscule difference in wealth, income, status, etc. than equality is impossible to achieve, therefore I win. Even if perfect equality is met then there will still be those who strive towards ambition of being elite, and then when others join up to them they will try to become more elite etc. Ad Infinitum. For an example of this I point to starters of businesses and corporations who must be ambitious to succeed. Again I stress the point that even the smallest change in equality means that there is no longer equality. thank you for this debate, it has been quite interesting.