Meaning of equality and its different aspects

Introduction

Equality is a value that is enshrined in the Indian Constitution, but we see inequality all around us: slums beside luxury housing, schools with world-class facilities beside schools without toilets, waste of food beside starvation. The question asks what the ideal means and what its aspects are.

Meaning of equality

As a political ideal equality means that all human beings have equal worth regardless of colour, gender, race or nationality, and deserve equal consideration and respect because of their common humanity. That does not mean identical treatment in every respect: society divides work and functions, and differences of status or reward that follow from it may be acceptable, as long as privileges are not misused. What the ideal rules out is treatment or opportunity that is pre-determined by birth or social circumstance, such as religion, race, caste or gender. A distinction is often drawn between natural inequalities (of talent and capability) and socially produced ones (from unequal opportunity or exploitation); but the line is not always clear, since inequalities long in place were often defended as natural (women as the weaker sex, black people as inferior) and have since been seen as products of power. Many theorists therefore prefer to distinguish inequalities that arise from our choices from those that arise from the family or circumstances into which we are born, and it is the latter that advocates of equality want to reduce.

Dimensions of equality

NCERT identifies three main dimensions: political, social and economic.

1. Political equality means equal citizenship for all members of the state, with the rights that go with it: the right to vote, freedom of expression, movement, association and belief. These are legal rights, guaranteed by the constitution and laws. It is an important component of an egalitarian society, but considerable inequality can persist where all citizens have equal rights, because of differences in resources and opportunities.
2. Social equality requires that people of different groups and communities have a fair and equal chance to compete for the goods and opportunities that society offers. That means minimising the effects of social and economic inequalities and guaranteeing minimum conditions of life: adequate health care, good education, adequate nourishment and a minimum wage. Where it is missing, a huge pool of talent is wasted. In India customs also create obstacles, for example denial of equal inheritance rights to women in some groups.
3. Economic equality exists to the degree that wealth, property or income are not widely different between individuals or classes. It can be measured by the gap between richest and poorest, or by the number below the poverty line. Absolute equality has probably never existed; most democracies try instead to make equal opportunities available. Entrenched inequalities, which remain untouched across generations, are especially dangerous: they divide society into classes and breed resentment and sometimes violence.

Other dimensions. Feminists point to gender inequality, which they trace to patriarchy; Rammanohar Lohia named five inequalities (gender, colour, caste, colonial rule and economic inequality) that must be fought together, with two further revolutions for civil liberties and non-violence. Marxists and liberals differ on how the dimensions are linked: for Marxists economic inequality supports the other forms and so public control of key resources is needed, whereas liberals hold that the three need not be linked and should each be tackled by suitable strategies.

Equality of opportunity

Equality of opportunity does not ask that everyone should end up with the same status, income or standing. Its test is whether people have fair access to the goods on which a decent life is built, such as a safe home, medical care and schooling, because it is unequal access to these, rather than unequal wealth or rank as such, that makes a society unequal and unjust. Once that access is secured, different results are to be expected: people choose different paths and bring different abilities and effort to them, so a school class that produces one Olympic shooter, one start-up founder and many people in ordinary jobs shows no unfairness on that count alone. Behind the idea lies a claim that every person holds simply as a human being: an equal right, and an equal chance, to develop one's abilities and to pursue the goals one sets.

Formal and substantive. Formal (legal) equality of opportunity removes legal barriers: nobody is excluded by law from an office or a school because of birth, caste or sex. Substantive or fair equality of opportunity goes further, because a race with open entry can still be unfair if some runners start far behind. Think of a girl whose village school has one teacher for five classes and who works on the family farm after school, set beside a city child with books at home and a quiet room to study in: the law treats them alike, but their chances are not alike, and those from deprived groups need some special help if they are to compete fairly. The substantive view therefore asks the state to soften the effects of social and economic inequality and to secure certain minimum conditions of life for everyone; a society that fails to do so loses much of the talent born into it. Liberals add a qualification. State action to secure a minimum standard of living and equal opportunities may be needed, they accept, but it cannot by itself produce equality and justice; what shares out rewards, jobs and college places most fairly and efficiently is open competition held under free and fair conditions. On this view a bank that recruits its officers through one written test, open to every graduate and run under the same rules for all, distributes its jobs fairly, and the result is left to each candidate's ability and effort.

Difficulties. (a) Equality of opportunity cannot be perfect so long as family background, caste and wealth differ; (b) differential treatment aimed at it, such as reservations, raises disputes about fairness to others; (c) critics say that a ladder of competition can still leave those at the bottom badly off, which leads to demands for a "social minimum" or equality of outcome.

Conclusion

Equality means equal worth and equal respect, not identical treatment; it has political, social and economic aspects, and also a gender dimension, and the aspects are served by formal equality, differential treatment where needed, and policies such as affirmative action.