The Politics of Equality over Freedom

“Equality of all men – the egalitarian ideal – can only be achieved if all men are precisely uniform, precisely identical with respect to all of their attributes.  The egalitarian world would necessarily be a world devoid of all individuality, variety, or special creativity.”

– Egalitarianism As a Revolt Against Nature

Equality is an impossible goal because it is unattainable without human intervention.  Differences in people are natural and beneficial.  Society depends on these people with different skills, desires, and characteristics to fill the variety of jobs that make the economy function.  Inequality, therefore, is not only fair, but it is, in fact, a sign that human nature has been allowed to flourish.  Why?  Because people are inherently unequal. 

Equality, in theory, is a foundational concept that all people should be treated fairly and accorded equal standing.  Equality in practice, however, seeks intervention to achieve such goals, often interfering with individual rights to create equal outcomes.  But to attain equality of outcomes in a free society, coercion must be employed.  That is, to achieve sameness, we must disregard nature and socially construct equality.

In Murray Rothbard’s 1974 book, “Egalitarianism as a Revolt Against Nature”, Rothbard, in a collection of essays, shows how the state’s goal of forced equality is antithetical to the natural structure of man.  This desire for equal outcomes is not only a threat to freedom, innovation, and individual autonomy but also an obstacle to progress and growth in society.  Rothbard, a pioneer of Anarcho-Capitalism, a political and economic philosophy of natural rights, advocated for self-ownership, property rights, and private voluntary institutions in a free market. 

Self-ownership is the core principle of American rights, as the Declaration of Independence states that all men are created equal and endowed with the inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  As such, we are the only legitimate owners of our lives, including our labor. 

Progressive egalitarianism, however, is hostile to the promises in the founding documents.  Since not all men were treated as equals during the period of slavery, they believe it is the duty of the state to step in and level the playing field.  But slavery itself was a crime against nature that was protected by the state.  The Declaration of Independence didn’t create the injustice; unjust, fallible men did.  In fact, slavery would have been considered incompatible with the endowment of individual rights.  Progressives also presuppose that all inequality is the result of injustice, often ignoring all other evidence.

Instead, egalitarianism creates a class of people who are privileged over others, demanding that they be treated differently under the law.   This empowers the state to serve a few at the expense of the many.  Wrapped in morality, the idea of equal outcomes or fairness hopes to make up for unequal starting points by using the state to implement policies and social programs.  These redistribution schemes, however, are not delegated in any of our founding documents.  They are, instead, artificial leveling devices, rooted in envy, to equalize all forms of inequality.  Since people are naturally unequal in talents, ability, and character, the Founders believed that we must respect natural differences so people can pursue their own ends. 

As a result, egalitarian efforts must not only be challenged for their misuse of state power but also for their moral and ethical lapses.  Personal liberty is grounded in the idea that people are naturally different, and there is no moral imperative that all people have equal outcomes. 

Today, equal outcomes are the rule rather than the exception, with chronic calls to reduce the gap between the rich and the poor.  But gaps are only problematic if they are attained by force or fraud.  That which comes from nature is the only set of traits that we should care about.