All Men Are Born As Equals — Yeah, right !!!
By: Frank Bates
Tags: Equity, Race, Gender, Equality, Educational

All Men Are Born As Equals — Yeah, right !!!

The popularly conceived notion that, ‘all men are created equal,’ is but a myth — a nonsense in fact. In the eyes of the religious ‘believer’, all men are supposed to have been created equal in the sight of God, creator all things, including mankind, but is this really the case? Reality emphatically suggests otherwise.

Equality among mankind is an idealistic and a non-sensical concept. One look around at people’s realities, at the diversity of social status, at individual difference and at people’s capacity to mentally, emotionally and physically strive for influence/ascendency over each other, makes the nonsense plainly obvious. Any attempt at supporting the existence of genuine equality is usually nothing more than an idealistic notion and a superficial smokescreen to mask the realities of life.

Those who have theorised that equality is achievable have neglected the ‘human factor’.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that Equality is a basic right. Like other Human Rights, it is an applaudable ideal, but what good is it if it cannot be granted? Sure, words can plant seeds for the growth of positive action but, sadly, Mankind has proven to be to be the ‘defoliant extraordinaire.’ It does not allow such ‘seeds’ to flourish while letting others grow, unaffected.

Equity, on the other hand is a different matter. Where ‘equality’ is treating everyone the same, providing the same rights for all, ‘equity’ treats people differently, according to their need. For example, schools in NZ have been classified in a ‘decile’ system whereby those schools with the greatest need get a greater share of the resources available to all schools. Under this system, every school is supposedly placed on an equal footing. They have equity.

Picture by F J B

To achieve equality, we would need to create a situation where everyone is on an even playing field — where all are treated equally, where opportunity is concerned. That’s the hard bit. From there, if different needs are catered for, equity might be achieved but only with a raft of accompanying social reform and a radical change in attitudes within the population. Reality suggests that this is unlikely.

As long as people don’t distinguish between the two terms, many will consider that ‘equality’ is the goal they are striving for.

Picture by F J B.

Who, then, determines who is and who isn’t ‘equal’? We have little knowledge or understanding of the life realities of other people. Empathy doesn’t exist without it. Without empathy, how can we even address the vexed issue of equality. How can we possibly judge whether or not someone has equal status, equal opportunity or the personal means to change their status without it.

It is a sad truth that few people really want equal status with some one they consider less worthy than themselves. And they will not act to facilitate it.

At the time of birth and under ideal circumstances, sure — every individual child will be born with the same, open mind. Genetic traits aside, the only possible contamination may come from the mother and her life experiences during gestation. Were those experiences ideal as well, then each new born would have an equal beginning to their life on earth. That’s as far as it goes. Life’s not like that and all the factors that are destined to influence the course of the newborn’s life would come to bear, in accordance with the environmental and social pressures on their physical and mental growth and wellbeing.

Think about what it is that stands in the way of the equality we are said to be born with? Are we the products of circumstance and environment or are we confined to particular life-paths by societal or genetic ‘strait jackets?’ Some will maintain that it is a combination of both but, whatever it is, equality is but a myth perpetuated by those who have achieved some measure of ascendency over others, and who promote the belief that, “If I can, anyone can.”

Every child born is a mixture of combined genetic pools, centered on their parentage. Geneticists will explain that with every conception of a child there will be a change in the genetic code for that individual. It will be a combination of genetic characteristics of their parents. The changes will often follow the genes which are dominant in each of them. We often recognise elements of each parent (and grandparent quite often) in the child, perhaps one more so than the other. These traits make up the child’s appearance, character and personality, abilities and talents, intellect, and so much more.

This combination will be different for every child. It’s what ‘comes naturally’. Each will have their own unique look, personality and character traits. Many are similar but none are identical. No equality there, for sure. When we encounter these factors, we all respond differently to them.

‘Opportunity’, according to some, makes the difference. We, supposedly, live in a land of equal opportunity. Truth is, however, that not every person is afforded the same opportunities in life, nor is every person able to grasp the opportunities that are laid before them, if they are offered them at all. Is it for reasons of circumstance or environment that this is so, or is it more to do with the way in which the mind is unwittingly programmed throughout the course of their lives? Does self-belief play a part? Where does prejudice come into the equation? So many variables to consider.

Look more closely at some of these variables:

Every individual is born with combinations of personal characteristics which render him a unique being. Circumstance and environment may well inhibit or encourage the development of these characteristics which shape the life paths that people tread. It is rare indeed, though, to find two people who share exactly the same course in life even when the same circumstances and environments favour them both. The converse of this situation, when things are unfavourable, is bound by the same truth.

Picture by F J B

While it should not carry the significance it does, our responses to the appearance of others is a major factor. A person’s skin colour, manner of speech, accent, dress style, physical features, mannerisms , sexuality— all have a bearing on how we will perceive them as people. We judge people this way, we form a view of how ‘equal’ they are to us. All of this is based on our unconscious biases and prejudices which have been accumulated, through life’s experiences and external influences, to become a part of our internal fabric.

Opportunity plays a part in life’s course — no doubt. But a person’s ability to take advantage of ‘opportunity’, when it presents itself, varies markedly. The ability to make wise and fruitful decisions, in determining what to do with opportunities, relates more to mental and emotional predisposition than to environment and circumstance. It is the way the brain is ‘wired’ and not just the ‘programming’ of it that determines where life will take them.

Cultural mores play a subtle but significant role in making decisions about life’s directions. The ‘programmes’, which develop the minds of mankind, are determined by the individual’s capacity to cope with the circumstantial and environmental influences on their realities. It also involves their will and confidence to pursue their own particular strengths, interests, aptitudes, talents and views of the world in the face of them.

Ascendency over others — ‘better the top of the heap than the bottom’— is a basic survival instinct which is stronger in some than in others. It does, however, exist in everyone. Mankind will always aspire to dominate — to acquire and to hold an ascendency over others in some way or other. Every man spends a lifetime establishing his place in all facets of society. To deny this is to deny history, for the history of mankind is a hierarchical history.

Few, however, will freely admit to seeking ascendency over others — they will mask it under the guises of ambition and the betterment of the species. The British Crown colonisers, for example, believed New Zealand Maori would prosper under their rule and relegated their existence to second class because they were ‘uncivilised’. They were also more interested in acquiring Maori land than in the people themselves. Preconceived prejudices were at work.

Even fewer individuals may actually evolve to a point in their lives where they no longer need to seek recognition for their place in the scheme of things. They have the self confidence to challenge the world around them. Most of us, though, will balk at the barriers in our way.

And where is ‘justice and equity’ in all of this? Again, there are those who are mentally and emotionally equipped to lay claim to their right to ‘fairness’ in all things. But there are those who aren’t. Environment and circumstance will determine that there are always those who, because of their genetic predisposition, their emotional and cognitive strengths, plus their ‘life stories’, will find that standing up for themselves is beyond them. They include the vulnerable, those with intellectual, cognitive, mental, emotional and psychological disabilities. That is but one example. There will never be enough advocates to stand in their defense.

Barriers — race, age, gender, culture, beliefs, sexual persuasion, political ideology preferences, housing and employment/income — blatant and subtle — stand in the way of the possibility of equality. All of us develop mindsets which determine where we stand on each issue. Some inequalities are overtly obvious. Wealth and social standing are examples of this. Ethnicity and race, subject to prejudicial attitudes, are less evident but ever present. The attitude of, “I’m alright Jack”, is all too common and unhelpful to those who are not, ‘alright’.

It is human nature, though, that is the ultimate villain of the piece. Observe in any school yard. Here you will witness a constant sorting process, during the formative years of childhood, which manifests itself through the creation of a ‘pecking order’ of sorts. This ill-defined, hierarchical structure is based upon the natural attributes of each and every individual. Appearance, talent, personality, character, ethnicity, impediment — all come into play in the ‘sorting’ process. They are instrumental in shaping children’s realities.

Where the differences are not clearly defined, where self-promotion is undermined by uncertainty, bullying becomes a means to ascending to a higher station in the order of things. Seeking ascendency or acceptance by association is common. Keeping a low profile as a means of self protection is common as well. There is a fluid hierarchical system in action at all times. Any notion of equality is hard to find.

Following the turbulence of growing up, there will emerge people who are anything but equal. The courses their lives will start to follow will have been established. They will find the outside world to be little different to the school yard — perhaps less turbulent and more subtle, but with more places to hide or to shine, as the case may be. All will find a niche for themselves somewhere. It will mark their station in life. They will not hold equal status.

Picture by F J B

It comes down to ‘opportunity’ and everyone’s access to it. Giving everyone access to equal opportunity would never sit easily with those who consider others less worthy of the right to that opportunity. People’s haste to downplay the worthiness of others is a societal norm. As a species we are quick to judge, to accuse and to actively work against the provision of equal opportunity for all. It is the way in which, through economics and belief systems, society has evolved. Just think about the progress towards recognising the place of women in the workforce.

Are we all working towards overcoming the many inequalities that exist? It does concern some who devote time and effort to creating a more equal society. They nibble away at it in many forums but what they do is never to the liking of everyone, especially those who claim privilege over others, for whatever reasons.

Whatever the oracles say about democratic equality being there for everyone to enjoy, realise that they are promoting a myth. There will always be ‘Chiefs’ and there will always be ‘Indians’, and it is the Chiefs who make the decisions which influence people’s lives.

We chip away at the broader issues, with some slow progress towards relative equalities, such as with gender pay rates in employment, work opportunities, access to education, and individual rights under the law. Is there really and end point in focus? What are the chances of transforming the realities of people within one diverse social system, let alone the realities in other less developed or under privileged countries which are bound together, internationally, with their corrupt, political and commercial realities and their ingrained prejudices as well as their inherent wealth divides.? Remote, to say the least.

Circumstances, social mores and environmental factors will certainly influence the minds of men but it is their genetic pre-disposition which will always stand in the way of equality. As long as survival remains as a basic instinct, equality will remain but a dream. It is time to cast aside the trite and poorly conceived myths that, ‘all men are created equal,’ and that true equality is achievable.

Frank Bates. 2020.