Tag: Equality

Equality (Revisited)

Inkwell Institute

Professor’s Classroom

Subject:  Equality/Government/Political Philosophy

Paper  #7A

Note:  In my last paper, Equality–What Is It Good For?”, I omitted explaining where the different political ideologies stand on the subject…….I would like to correct that oversight on my part……..I would like to thank Andrew Heywood and his book “Political Ideologies” for the breakdown by political leanings……he gave a much better synopsis than I would have….and in fewer words……I like simple but informative….

When it comes to people what are their particular beliefs in the “institution” of equality……I am glad you asked…..

Liberals:  believe that people are born equal, in the sense of equal moral value….this implies formal equality, as well as the equality of opportunity.  Classical liberal thinking emphasizes the need for strict meritocracy and economic incentives—modern liberals argue that genuine equal opportunities require relative social equality.

Conservatives:  view society as naturally hierarchical and have dismissed equality as an abstract and unachievable goal.  Modern conservatives see a strongly individualist belief in equality of opportunity while emphasizing the economic benefits of material inequality.

Socialists:  regard equality as essential and a fundamental value and endorse social equality.  Regardless of shifts in type of socialism, equality is seen as necessary for the establishment of justice or equality, and the enlarging more freedom in a positive sense.

Anarchists:  stress political equality, as understood as equal and absolute right to personal autonomy, implying that all forms of political inequality amounts to oppression.

Fascists:  believe that all of humankind is marked by radical inequality, between leaders and followers and between various nations or races…..nevertheless, the emphasis on nation or race implies that all members are equal, in terms of their core social identity.

There you have the major political ideologies and how they view the idea of equality…..remember, also, that there are many sub-categories within these ideas and that some of the views are tweaked to reflect their view of the subject.

To be continued……Next…….Why Party Politics?

Equality? What Is It Good For?

Inkwell Institute

Professor’s Classroom

Subject:  Equality/Philosophy/

Paper #7

Absolutely…NOTHING!

In the days of yore….a group of like minded aristocrats got together and with the help of a writer came up with a document for independence and the immortal words, “All men are created equal”…….now that brings us to the question what is equality?  And what the Hell were they talking about?

I must preface my post with the fact that the concept of equality is subjective…..it means what you want it to mean….and that is not necessarily the most accurate of definitions…..

“All men are created equal”…..a great statement but here is absolute NO one that believes that for a second…..we all have our little things that we are somehow a bit better than someone else….if you do not agree then you are ignoring a basic human belief….we are not all born equal!  Some are more intelligent or more gifted in certain duties than others….this is not to say that it is racist or bigotry just a basic evolutionary fact…..

If the Framers really believed the quote then why did they allow the institution of slavery to continue?….I do not think the Founders real believed that we were all born equal….however they did believe that we all have an equal opportunity to succeed…not would be a stark difference than their little line in a document…..but after all they were trying to get people on board with the whole independence thing….

If you truly think that the Founders believed their own words, would Jefferson have said this:

“Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate than that these people [blacks] are to be free. Nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit, opinion has drawn indelible lines of distinction between them.” –Thomas Jefferson: Autobiography, 1821. ME 1:72

The “Opportunity for Equality” or to put it another way, the “Equality of Opportunity”…..that we all have the opportunity to be equal as far as economic issues go….with hard work and the rest of that imaginary crap goes…..

Equality?  Like I have stated…there will be a wealth of opinions on just what the word means…..and in the beginning….the masters of the revolution  never really intended for it to actually mean that we are all total equal……more that we all have an equal chance at success…..to put it simply….

Ain’t equality great?  Thoughts?

Who Was America’s First Feminist?

Professor’s Classroom

Subject:  Women’s Studies/American History

It is March and that would make it Women’s History Month…..what better time than now to try and right a historical wrong?  I do not want to take anything away from the people that worked long and hard as suffragist  and feminists, they tolled long and hard to help women get their deserved place in history and in society.  Women like Clara Barton, Susan B. Anthony, Helen Keller, all women that gave their all for the cause…..

Almost every timeline that I see about women’s rights there seems to be a consensus that Abigail Adams, wife of Founder Father John Adams, told her husband while he and the others were working on the Declaration of Independence  in 1776 to, “Remember the Ladies”….she is usually the first entry in the timeline on the fight for women rights…….

Actually, there was another about two years before Abigail’s now famous line……in 1774,  a man, not a normal man but rather an idealists that led the charge to independence as well as the fight against slavery and the first person in the Colonies that called for the rights that women truly deserved….that man was Thomas Paine…..

He wrote an essay entitled:  “An Occasional Letter On The Female Sex”:

Society, instead of alleviating their condition, is to them the source of new miseries. More than one half of the globe is covered with savages; and among all these people women are completely wretched. Man, in a state of barbarity, equally cruel and indolent, active by necessity, but naturally inclined to repose, is acquainted with little more than the physical effects of love; and, having none of those moral ideas which only can soften the empire of force, he is led to consider it as his supreme law, subjecting to his despotism those whom reason had made his equal, but whose imbecility betrayed them to his strength. “Nothing” (says Professor Miller, speaking of the women of barbarous nations) “can exceed the dependence and subjection in which they are kept, or the toil and drudgery which they are obliged to undergo. The husband, when he is not engaged in some warlike exercise, indulges himself in idleness, and devolves upon his wife the whole burden of his domestic affairs. He disdains to assist her in any of those servile employments. She sleeps in a different bed, and is seldom permitted to have any conversation or correspondence with him.”

The above is a portion of the essay that Paine wrote in 1774 for the Pennsylvania Magazine…..

Paine was a staunch supporter of human rights…..he opposed slavery in ALL forms…..and he especially found that women were treated more like property than equals….that they had NO voice and NO station other than arm candy and as a baby factory….he deplored the treatment of women and was one of the first, if not the first, to speak out in women’s defense…….

We as a country owe Thomas Paine a great deal….more than we could ever repay him for….his service to this country goes almost totally ignored….a sad fact that I attempt to rectify……I take every opportunity to point out the accomplishments of Thomas Paine because the US owes him a large debt that we have yet to pay….

When we celebrate Women’s History Month…let us look to Thomas Paine as the First feminist, who took on the establishment on the behalf of women….GIVE THE MAN HIS DUE!

Equality? What Is It Good For?

Inkwell Institute

Professor’s Classroom

Subject:  Equality/Philosophy/

Paper #7

Absolutely…NOTHING!

In the days of yore….a group of like minded aristocrats got together and with the help of a writer came up with a document for independence and the immortal words, “All men are created equal”…….now that brings us to the question what is equality?  And what the Hell were they talking about?

I must preface my post with the fact that the concept of equality is subjective…..it means what you want it to mean….and that is not necessarily the most accurate of definitions…..

“All men are created equal”…..a great statement but here is absolute NO one that believes that for a second…..we all have our little things that we are somehow a bit better than someone else….if you do not agree then you are ignoring a basic human belief….we are not all born equal!  Some are more intelligent or more gifted in certain duties than others….this is not to say that it is racist or bigotry just a basic evolutionary fact…..

If the Framers really believed the quote then why did they allow the institution of slavery to continue?….I do not think the Founders real believed that we were all born equal….however they did believe that we all have an equal opportunity to succeed…not would be a stark difference than their little line in a document…..but after all they were trying to get people on board with the whole independence thing….

If you truly think that the Founders believed their own words, would Jefferson have said this:

“Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate than that these people [blacks] are to be free. Nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit, opinion has drawn indelible lines of distinction between them.” –Thomas Jefferson: Autobiography, 1821. ME 1:72

The “Opportunity for Equality” or to put it another way, the “Equality of Opportunity”…..that we all have the opportunity to be equal as far as economic issues go….with hard work and the rest of that imaginary crap goes…..

Equality?  Like I have stated…there will be a wealth of opinions on just what the word means…..and in the beginning….the masters of the revolution  never really intended for it to actually mean that we are all total equal……more that we all have an equal chance at success…..to put it simply….

Ain’t equality great?  Thoughts?

A First For Saudi women

The appointment of a woman to Saudi Arabia’s influential council of ministers is a “first step” for women’s rights in the country, but it’s unclear if she will have any real power, an outspoken advocate said Sunday.

King Abdullah on Saturday appointed Norah al-Faiz to serve as the newly created deputy minister for women’s education as part of a major Cabinet reshuffling. It is the first time a woman has been appointed to the council.

“I’m very proud to be nominated and selected for such a prestigious position,” al-Faiz said. “I hope that other ladies, females, will follow in the future.”

She noted that Saudi women still do not have the right to drive and are recognized under Saudi law as the property of men.

Al-Maeena said that King Abdullah has “always been on the side of women and this stems from his pure and ideal Islamic values, which gives rights to women. …”

“But unfortunately,” he said. “Over the past few decades, there had been some, you know, backrolling of women’s participation.”

Now this is something to celebrate right?  IMO, NO!  This is just a move to silence all their critics in the West.  Women in Saudi Arabia will be NO better off now than they were last week.

This is a smoke screen!  Saudi Arabia has taken a lot of criticism recently for its policies towards women.

Now if they want me to believe that women are equal, then let them drive, give them equal rights,  maybe when they accomplish that the world will stop being so critical of their policies toward women and they can move into the 21st century with most of us.

About Damn Time!

Declaring that ending pay disparity is not just a women’s issue, President Barack Obama signed legislation Thursday that gives workers more time to take their pay discrimination cases to court.

Lilly Ledbetter, the Alabama woman whose story was the impetus behind the new law, stood alongside Obama as he signed the first bill of his presidency. Also in the East Room of the White House were labor, women’s, civil rights advocates and members of Congress for whom the bill was a priority.

“Equal pay is by no means just a women’s issue, it’s a family issue,” Obama said. “And in this economy, when so many folks are already working harder for less and struggling to get by, the last thing they can afford is losing part of each month’s paycheck to simple and plain discrimination.”

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act effectively nullifies a 2007 Supreme Court decision that denied Ledbetter an opportunity for redress.

Ledbetter, 70, has said she did not learn about the sizable discrepancy in pay between her and her male co-workers until near the end of her 19-year career at a Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. plant in Gadsden, Ala. She sued, but the high court said in a 5-4 decision that she missed her chance to bring the action.

The court said a person must file a discrimination claim within 180 days of a company’s initial decision to pay a worker less than another doing the same job.

Under the new law, each new discriminatory paycheck would extend the statute of limitations for an additional 180 days. That was the interpretation before the Supreme Court was asked to step in.

The Bush White House and Senate Republicans blocked the bill in the last session of Congress. But Obama strongly supported it — he talked often about Ledbetter during the presidential campaign — and the Democratic-controlled Congress made it a priority in its opening weeks.

A Win For Women (Finally)

The House voted on Friday to give women powerful new tools to challenge sex discrimination by employers who pay women less than men for the same or substantially similar work.

The House passed two related bills on Friday. One, approved 247 to 171, would give workers more time to file lawsuits claiming job discrimination.

The bill would overturn a 2007 decision by the Supreme Court that enforced a strict 180-day deadline, thwarting a lawsuit by Lilly M. Ledbetter, a longtime supervisor at the Goodyear tire plant in Gadsden, Ala. Three Republicans voted for the bill.

The other bill — passed 256 to 163, with support from 10 Republicans — would make it easier for women to prove violations of the Equal Pay Act of 1963, which generally requires equal pay for equal work.

In the Ledbetter case, a jury found that Goodyear had paid her less than men, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. But the Supreme Court, in a 5-to-4 decision, threw out her complaint. It said she should have filed her claim within 180 days of “the alleged unlawful employment practice,” the initial decision to pay her less than men performing similar work.

“The Ledbetter decision is unacceptable and must not stand,” said Representative George Miller, Democrat of California and chairman of the Committee on Education and Labor. Under the decision, Mr. Miller said, employers can get away with years of pay discrimination “if they hide it for the first 180 days.”

The bill would relax the statute of limitations, making clear that each new paycheck violates the law if it results “in whole or in part” from a discriminatory pay decision made in the past.

Under the 1963 law, an employer can justify paying women less than men if it shows that the disparity is based on any factor other than sex. Employers have successfully used this defense in many cases, arguing that unequal pay was justified by the education, training or experience of male employees.

Some courts have also held that a company can legally pay men more than women because of “market forces” or the higher salaries that men received in previous jobs. Democrats said those factors — market forces and prior salaries — were themselves sometimes tainted by discrimination.

The bill would make it harder for employers to use such defenses. Employers would have to show that the pay disparity was based on “a bona fide factor” other than sex, and that the factor was “consistent with business necessity.”

The bill would also allow women to obtain compensatory and punitive damages from employers who violated the equal pay law.

The White House said the bill would allow “unlimited compensatory and punitive damages, even when a disparity in pay was unintentional.” Under the new standard, it continued, “judges and juries would supplant the free market system” in determining wages.