What do conservatives think about equality ?

[Tom]

With regards to broad principles, freedom, equality, justice..

I think reasonable liberals and conservatives for the most part agree what freedom and justice mean, and that they are both desirable.

equality. seem to be big differences in what this means and how much equality there should be. Seems to drive the conflicts over tax systems, healthcare reform, school funding etc.

I'd like to better understand conservative views on equality ?

 

[Carmen813]

With regards to broad principles, freedom, equality, justice..

I think reasonable liberals and conservatives for the most part agree what freedom and justice mean, and that they are both desirable.

equality. seem to be big differences in what this means and how much equality there should be. Seems to drive the conflicts over tax systems, healthcare reform, school funding etc.

I'd like to better understand conservative views on equality ?

Some people are more equal than others. Namely old white men.






Relax, I jest, I jest.

In reality I'd say Conservatives believe that less business regulation will lead to a more equal society. Sort of like social Darwinism. They believe that by limiting governments role in lives everyone is giving an equal chance to succeed. Some people will not succeed, whether by choice or by bad luck, and the charity of others (not government) will take care of them. Conservatives tend to see government as a fundamentally tyrannical entity that if given the chance will act to restrict person liberty and freedom of individuals (and thus lower equality).

Liberals believe that in order to have a more equal society you need to have a more equal distribution of wealth (and the power that comes with wealth). Rather than rely on charity, liberals believe government should be proactive in trying to create equality, which leads to social welfare programs. Liberals tend to see the government as a fundamentally good entity that acts for the benefit of the oppressed.

 

[brblx]

Some people are more equal than others. Namely old white men.

and they're made more equal by the poor white people who insist on blind allegiance to them.

...doesn't make sense to me, either.

 

[cubeless]

equality is an artificial construct... there is no such thing in nature... everything has its own advantages/disadvantages as a result of its nature and nurture...

my belief is that you try to eliminate roadblocks to anyone being able to achieve what their nature allows...

but the equality infrastructure is mostly a political device to pander to some voting block...

 

[PJABBER]

With regards to broad principles, freedom, equality, justice..

I think reasonable liberals and conservatives for the most part agree what freedom and justice mean, and that they are both desirable.

equality. seem to be big differences in what this means and how much equality there should be. Seems to drive the conflicts over tax systems, healthcare reform, school funding etc.

I'd like to better understand conservative views on equality ?

I believe you are very wrong to make that assumption. The differences are very much there.

May I suggest two articles? Both delineate the ideas of freedom and justice quite well and the differences which exist between what is labeled "conservative" but is in actuality more what was envisioned by the Founding Fathers and the modern or welfare liberalism as the word is used today only here in the United States.

Both are too long to post in their entirety here. If you are really curious about the distinctions, however, they are a good place to start.

Classical Liberalism, Libertarianism, and Individualism
http://www.radicalacademy.com/philclassliberalism.htm

What Is Classical Liberalism?
http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/whatisclassicalliberalism.pdf

 

[fskimospy]

With regards to broad principles, freedom, equality, justice..

I think reasonable liberals and conservatives for the most part agree what freedom and justice mean, and that they are both desirable.

equality. seem to be big differences in what this means and how much equality there should be. Seems to drive the conflicts over tax systems, healthcare reform, school funding etc.

I'd like to better understand conservative views on equality ?

I think the broad principle for equality comes back to the idea of liberty/freedom/whatever. Conservatives in general believe in 'negative liberty'. What that basically means is that the government should be generally hands off on things and that will provide an equality of opportunity for everyone to have the same chance to succeed.

Modern Liberals believe in 'positive liberty'. This is in response to things like the robber barons, pervasive racism in the South, things like that. That boils down to the belief that sometimes government has to take an active role to protect the equality of people in order to have a level playing field. For example in the South where there might not have been a law on the books that says 'white people can't hire black people', but...well... you know how that went.

 

[spidey07]

It's real easy. Conservatives believe in equal opportunity for all.

Liberals believe in equal outcomes for all.

 

[brblx]

It's real easy. Conservatives believe in equal opportunity for all.

Liberals believe in equal outcomes for all.

for your sake, i hope you're a millionaire.

if not, you must by your own reasoning be a dumb, lazy piece of shit.

 

[Tom]

I'd rather discuss the fundamental beliefs about equality first, rather than what's the best way to acheive it, if it's desirable to achieve it. Because as soon as we talk about ways to get to a goal, it gets really complex very quickly.

If we don't agree about the goal, and maybe we don't, then discussing solutions aren't going to be fruitful.

 

[Cutterhead]

I think conservatives mostly consider equality to be an issue only as it pertains to the rights afforded to individuals. If all individuals have the same personal liberties, rights, etc. then it is up to each individual what they accomplish with themselves when afforded these freedoms, so any discussion of equality beyond this becomes largerly driven by more liberal ideologies, with conservatives advocating the opposition. From what I gather of liberal views on equality - they generally extend beyond individual rights, and may encompass anything from equality in economic status, to equality in available healthcare, to equality in [insert political issue here]. In terms of defining equality, it just seems to me that the line gets blurrier and blurrier the further you move from the individual towards what could be considered the collective equality. This is why conservatives are generally in favor of smaller government, lower taxes, and greater individual responsibility, while liberals are generally in favor of collective (i.e. gov/tax) solutions to many of society's issues, which come at the expense of the individual.

 

[Tom]

equality is an artificial construct... there is no such thing in nature... everything has its own advantages/disadvantages as a result of its nature and nurture...

my belief is that you try to eliminate roadblocks to anyone being able to achieve what their nature allows...

but the equality infrastructure is mostly a political device to pander to some voting block...

there are at least 2 things in nature that are equal, death and time. Beyond that, equality is something that is created by how things interact, wolves share a carcass, the biggest wolf doesn't kill all the other wolves.

 

[Carmen813]

I think conservatives mostly consider equality to be an issue only as it pertains to the rights afforded to individuals. If all individuals have the same personal liberties, rights, etc. then it is up to each individual what they accomplish with themselves when afforded these freedoms, so any discussion of equality beyond this becomes largerly driven by more liberal ideologies, with conservatives advocating the opposition. From what I gather of liberal views on equality - they generally extend beyond individual rights, and may encompass anything from equality in economic status, to equality in available healthcare, to equality in [insert political issue here]. In terms of defining equality, it just seems to me that the line gets blurrier and blurrier the further you move from the individual towards what could be considered the collective equality. This is why conservatives are generally in favor of smaller government, lower taxes, and greater individual responsibility, while liberals are generally in favor of collective (i.e. gov/tax) solutions to many of society's issues, which come at the expense of the individual.

In terms of health care, I see the health care reform as being very liberating for me as an individual, but I understand how it might negatively impact the liberty of others. Collective solutions are generally community based, i.e., what is best for the family/community/state/country as opposed to what is best for individuals. On a large scale that means government, but it doesn't have to occur at that level. Even individuals make decisions about what they think is best for small groups (such as a family).

In general I agree with what you said, sans the part about individual responsibility. Liberals are not against individual responsibility, though often labeled that way.

 

[Mursilis]

I'd like to better understand conservative views on equality ?

Equality is a vague term - if you want a fruitful discussion, please define it better. I could say I'm totally, 100% in favor of equality, but what would that tell you? Absolutely nothing.

 

[Tom]

I think conservatives mostly consider equality to be an issue only as it pertains to the rights afforded to individuals. If all individuals have the same personal liberties, rights, etc. then it is up to each individual what they accomplish with themselves when afforded these freedoms, so any discussion of equality beyond this becomes largerly driven by more liberal ideologies, with conservatives advocating the opposition. From what I gather of liberal views on equality - they generally extend beyond individual rights, and may encompass anything from equality in economic status, to equality in available healthcare, to equality in [insert political issue here]. In terms of defining equality, it just seems to me that the line gets blurrier and blurrier the further you move from the individual towards what could be considered the collective equality. This is why conservatives are generally in favor of smaller government, lower taxes, and greater individual responsibility, while liberals are generally in favor of collective (i.e. gov/tax) solutions to many of society's issues, which come at the expense of the individual.

Say we can both agree with the "right to life". As a liberal I would say that includes the right to healthcare. Leaving aside who or how it's paid for for a moment.

Do you agree or disagree ?

now paying for it. I'm a liberal but also a libertarian in some ways, so I can see 2 ways of dealing with healthcare. However, I think all children should be covered collectively if their parents don't provide for them.

1. I'd prefer everyone have the same level of healthcare insurance, we decide what we can afford collectively, what makes sense, and then we all pay our share of the cost. So single payer basically. But I admit I don't know how to apply market forces in this model to control costs.

2. keep what we have now but people without insurance have to pay for their healthcare in advance, or die.

 

[xchangx]

there are at least 2 things in nature that are equal, death and time. Beyond that, equality is something that is created by how things interact, wolves share a carcass, the biggest wolf doesn't kill all the other wolves.

Yeah, but the stronger wolves will eat first and more.

 

[Tom]

Equality is a vague term - if you want a fruitful discussion, please define it better. I could say I'm totally, 100% in favor of equality, but what would that tell you? Absolutely nothing.

that's true. but if i'm defining it then i'm not getting your definition. which is what i'm looking for.

 

[Tom]

Yeah, but the stronger wolves will eat first and more.

right. which means wolves don't believe in absolute equality, neither do I or any liberals I know of. But practical equality has a purpose beyond feeling good.

like, i don't believe in equal educational opportunity because it's nice, but because I think it leads to the best outcome.

 

[Hacp]

Equal and fair are two different things. In a world where things are equal, the person who works hard gets the same slice of the pie as a lazy person. In a fair world, the hard worker gets the whole pizza while the lazy guy starves to death.

 

[fskimospy]

Equal and fair are two different things. In a world where things are equal, the person who works hard gets the same slice of the pie as a lazy person. In a fair world, the hard worker gets the whole pizza while the lazy guy starves to death.

Or you could say that in an equal world two people working just as hard get the same amount of pizza for their work... which is what liberals are going for.

This thread could be pretty useful, might help dispel some misconceptions.

 

[Mursilis]

that's true. but if i'm defining it then i'm not getting your definition. which is what i'm looking for.

Again, if you're asking for my definition, that's going to be just as vague, because it's context-specific. Politically, I believe strongly in equality before the law, and I think society has an interest in promoting equality of opportunity, especially for the young. Other than that, citizens are on their own.

 

[boomerang]

there are at least 2 things in nature that are equal, death and time. Beyond that, equality is something that is created by how things interact, wolves share a carcass, the biggest wolf doesn't kill all the other wolves.

But all the wolves work together to kill the animal. Those wolves that choose to not participate in the hunt, are not allowed to share the meal. When those who choose not to participate get hungry enough, they participate.

 

[Mursilis]

Or you could say that in an equal world two people working just as hard get the same amount of pizza for their work... which is what liberals are going for.

This just goes back to what I was saying about definitions - vague words like "liberty, equality, and fairness" are meaningless without shared understandings of the concepts. Your example, to me, is more an example of a fair world, and an equal one only by coincidence, but really, neither of us is wrong in an objective sense.

 

[Tom]

Again, if you're asking for my definition, that's going to be just as vague, because it's context-specific. Politically, I believe strongly in equality before the law, and I think society has an interest in promoting equality of opportunity, especially for the young. Other than that, citizens are on their own.

thanks, that's what I'm looking for. See I believe discussions are better if we understand where we start from, otherwise some positions are hard to understand.

I agree with your statement on promoting equality of opportunity, lets take a specific.

estate tax. If we both believe in equality of opportunity for young people, and if I can assume that we can agree that money or the lack of it effects opportunity, then if that was the only consideration would we both want all youngster to start out with the same funds available ?

Of course there's a conflicting right, the right to profit by one's labors. I think we both agree on that right ?

If we do, now there's a conflict between the right to amass wealth and pass that on to one's heirs, and the inequality of opportunity that creates for the children of less wealthy parents.

Where we stand on that conflict seems to me ought to be the difference between liberal and conservative.

 

[dmcowen674]

What do conservatives think about equality ?

They don't.

 

[boomerang]

thanks, that's what I'm looking for. See I believe discussions are better if we understand where we start from, otherwise some positions are hard to understand.

I agree with your statement on promoting equality of opportunity, lets take a specific.

estate tax. If we both believe in equality of opportunity for young people, and if I can assume that we can agree that money or the lack of it effects opportunity, then if that was the only consideration would we both want all youngster to start out with the same funds available ?

Of course there's a conflicting right, the right to profit by one's labors. I think we both agree on that right ?

If we do, now there's a conflict between the right to amass wealth and pass that on to one's heirs, and the inequality of opportunity that creates for the children of less wealthy parents.

Where we stand on that conflict seems to me ought to be the difference between liberal and conservative.

Let's cut to the chase. How much of what other people worked to achieve do you feel you're entitled to just because you popped out of a vagina?