Why equality isn‘t uniformity
I’m starting to get readers that don’t speak Icelandic. And I want to sharpen my English writing skills. So I’ve decided to write in English from time to time. It will be on more universal themes. That’s what I’m thinking right now anyway. Maybe I’ll have a change of heart. We’ll see. Once upon a time I read a story about an imaginary future society. This might very well have been an Ayn Rand story or at least it‘s clear to me that its main purpose was to act as a counterweight to the socialist ideas of the early and middle 20th century. The story takes place in a society where equality has been taken to its extreme. In essence, to ensure that nobody feel inadequate. We are all brought to the same level. To play the piano. You must put on gloves that prevent you from hitting the notes. Everyone enjoys exactly the same standard of living. No more and no less. There are no experts in any given field.
This story stuck in my head. I can‘t remember the author or the name of the book. But this is very much the problem of equality. Start at any given point. Make everyone equal. After awhile things will get unequal again. In general I think equality is a good idea. Particularly, when applied to equal opportunity for people. That’s why I like taxes. They are a great way to redistribute wealth. From those who have more than they need. To those who most need it. Even Warren Buffet understood why it’s good for the economy for money to circulate, rather than to be left alone. But it also matters how you spend that money.
In the Nordics, we have a tendency to spend the taxes on education and health. In some other countries it ends up in the hands of generals and their families. For some reason we end up more and more wealthy, while things are apparently not going as well in the second example. There’s another good reason why things seem to work well in the Nordics. We have a strong judicial system that actually respects ownership. This means that if you own something. The law will protect that right. There’s the rule of law as opposed to a dictator or tyrant. Because it seems that the one man, one vote principle only works well if you give everyone the vote, not just the dictator.
In the Nordics we have some of the strongest equal opportunity movements in the world. But sometimes I see the unholy alliance of the religious right and feminists. Fighting against perceived evils. Which I’m sure are bad things that happen to good people. Maybe most of the time. But I’m not about to rant at feminists. I think they are well meaning and that we just need to be on our guard. That they don’t take away our freedom, in order to protect it. Which is the Orwellian logic used in the “war”. Whatever the war, and whichever the enemy might be. Recently people have come up with an amazingly bad idea for the Internet. They want to equalize it. Meaning that everyone should get exactly the same service from a particular ISP. In other words. If someone uses the Internet mainly to a)check their e-mail, look at their bank account, buy some shares and read the news or b) play online games, streams a movie, preferably both at the same time. It’s obvious nonsense that they'd have the same needs. Or so it would seem.
This story stuck in my head. I can‘t remember the author or the name of the book. But this is very much the problem of equality. Start at any given point. Make everyone equal. After awhile things will get unequal again. In general I think equality is a good idea. Particularly, when applied to equal opportunity for people. That’s why I like taxes. They are a great way to redistribute wealth. From those who have more than they need. To those who most need it. Even Warren Buffet understood why it’s good for the economy for money to circulate, rather than to be left alone. But it also matters how you spend that money.
In the Nordics, we have a tendency to spend the taxes on education and health. In some other countries it ends up in the hands of generals and their families. For some reason we end up more and more wealthy, while things are apparently not going as well in the second example. There’s another good reason why things seem to work well in the Nordics. We have a strong judicial system that actually respects ownership. This means that if you own something. The law will protect that right. There’s the rule of law as opposed to a dictator or tyrant. Because it seems that the one man, one vote principle only works well if you give everyone the vote, not just the dictator.
In the Nordics we have some of the strongest equal opportunity movements in the world. But sometimes I see the unholy alliance of the religious right and feminists. Fighting against perceived evils. Which I’m sure are bad things that happen to good people. Maybe most of the time. But I’m not about to rant at feminists. I think they are well meaning and that we just need to be on our guard. That they don’t take away our freedom, in order to protect it. Which is the Orwellian logic used in the “war”. Whatever the war, and whichever the enemy might be. Recently people have come up with an amazingly bad idea for the Internet. They want to equalize it. Meaning that everyone should get exactly the same service from a particular ISP. In other words. If someone uses the Internet mainly to a)check their e-mail, look at their bank account, buy some shares and read the news or b) play online games, streams a movie, preferably both at the same time. It’s obvious nonsense that they'd have the same needs. Or so it would seem.
Ummæli