Posted on 02/05/2014 8:40:42 AM PST by IChing
America’s Declaration of Independence enshrines the idea that all men are created equal. What it actually means is that everyone has the same rights to enjoy or suffer the consequences of their own decisions under the law, and to freely exist in whatever circumstances earned, given, or legally bequeathed to them.
When debating topics like affirmative action, and the more in-vogue topic of “income inequality,” fair-minded and conscientious conservatives are always quick to add the caveat that while they are against socially-engineered mandates to force uniform equality of outcomes, they nonetheless will nobly fight for the supposed equal opportunity of all people.
It’s as if basic equality of opportunity it is some kind of scared cow; a vital and essentially American principle not to be touched or jeopardized, ever, because to oppose it would be simply unreasonable, against common sense and morality, even anti-American.
This is one of the most widespread and successful myths ever foisted onto all of us by the Left. I believed it myself for most of my life, until I honestly thought about it.
We all want to be fair and just, never to be perceived as heartless and corrupt, so we sign up without hesitation to such a platitude without really examining it. Because most of us are pretty much never provoked by anyone, anywhere, to examine it. Well, I’m here to provoke you.
So let’s examine it.
First of all, is it not true that every opportunity is really also just another outcome? Think about it. No opportunity exists without being a result, an outcome, of prior choices and actions. None.
The doctrine of equal opportunity, if we really apply what it means, says that no one is to begin with any advantages over anyone else.
The only way to actually approach a situation where this is brought about is for the government to strip all parents of any ability whatsoever to raise their children in such a way that produces advantages for them, over the children of derelicts.
Sure, I feel for the children of derelicts, and as a matter of general principle, would like to help them. I’d even go as far as to say that we all have some degree of human duty to help where help is truly needed.
Does that mean I would deprive all parents of the legal prerogatives to raise their own kids in the best environment possible, with the best education possible, the best food, safety, entertainment, skill-development, social venues, and so forth? No. Absolutely not.
But if we are honest and accurate, we must realize that this is exactly what the doctrine of equal opportunity actually requires, to be applied. Even more appalling is that the Marxist Left is dead serious about stripping parents of their God-given right to raise their children according to their best auspices.
Those who have read The Communist Manifesto closely, and understand it, know that destroying the traditional family is exactly what Marx and Engels called for, and that their plan is for the state, the government, to take the place of parents and husbands. We have seen this play out before our very eyes, increasingly for decades, as government programs encourage and enable women to crank out illegitimate spawn left and right, ever the more purporting to shield them from the economic adversity that naturally results, while the public schools ramp up endless post-modernist propaganda designed to destroy traditional American values of morality and heritage, brainwashing entire generations of our young.
Let’s not forget Hillary Clinton’s Marxist maxim, “It Takes A Village” to raise a child…
When you see Barack Obama acting like dictator, seeking to force private employers to hire people who haven’t worked in years over people who have, understand what is really going on. Obama and his ilk condemn “discrimination,” but discrimination is exactly what we need more of in order to restore sensible rigor to our economy. There should be dire penalties and consequences for languishing while others hustle and make things happen. We should not continue to condition people to expect that some mindless, indiscriminate employer is the sole source of their sustenance, prospects, and fortunes. Such a pervasive cultural mindset vanquishes the can-do spirit.
The ant should prosper while the grasshopper perishes.
When you see Obama and his party seeking to increase capital gains taxes and to institute a “death tax,” understand what is going on. By deliberately eating away at the ability of parents to pass on to their progeny any fruits of good life choices and hard work, the Left wants to further attempt to bring about an alleged “classless” utopia, which we all should know by now only results in a totalitarian police state smashing all dissent and making starving slaves of everyone.
Income inequality is evidence of freedom–the freedom of enterprising, smart, hard workers to flourish, and the morally-sanctioned liberty of deadbeat derelicts to suffer and perhaps learn from the consequences of their poor choices.
If derelicts don’t really care about their own children, of course it does fall to some extent for the rest of us in society to step in and mitigate the unfortunate circumstances. But not to the point where our own kids are to be taken away from us, dumbed-down to the lowest communist denominator, and deprived of all benefits and advantages of good breeding and wise decisions by parents.
Please forward this to everyone who thinks that “equal opportunity” is fair and moral and right. It is not, and we all should stop promoting it.
When will this happen?
It should never happen, because it’s a bad idea.
Of course it is wrong. It has given us the most uneducated, immoral, narcissistic, and dorky president in the multi-multiverse.
And don’t even think of using the racist peg, libtards, I can sit here and name any number of folks of who you idiots have torpedoed (can you say Justice Thomas?) who are quantum levels over the Obamadork in every measurable category.
What I mean is, if it does happen, it should be incidental, not anything brought about by decree or legislation or mandate.
My understanding of ‘equal opportunity’ is the unbiased application of the rule of law. Nothing to do with the felonious premise of this author.
It’s biblical - a good man leaves an inheritance to his children’s children.
And, of course, as in all things, the left has the exact opposite view - heavy taxation of inheritance and attempts at “leveling the playing field” which are simply a devaluation of that inheritance.
Great thread! Thanks!
________________________
” - - - - no one is to begin with any advantages over anyone else. - - - “
IOW, if you are ahead of me, then you must hold back and wait for me to catch up with you, assuming that I want to catch up with you, of course.
Sigh, it all used to be so simple: “If you snooze, you lose.”
Ah, for the good old Days of The American Dream when if you built that, then you could keep it. Period.
I agree. The author has expanded equal opportunity to mean equality in all things or at least all start points, which it is not.
A fruit of the civil rights movement.
I do not doubt that there are great people in the public sector who earn every penny of what they are paid and more, but you cannot make a logical case that average for average, they are so much better than their private sector counterparts as reflected in their pay, job security and benefits.
“America’s Declaration of Independence enshrines the idea that all men are created equal. What it actually means is that everyone has the same rights to enjoy or suffer the consequences of their own decisions under the law, and to freely exist in whatever circumstances earned, given, or legally bequeathed to them.”
The DOI says “...that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights...”.
It might be more accurate to say that means all men are equally endowed with equal unalienable rights; that they may not constrain the rights of others by virtue of their creation.
The words “decisions under the law” and “legally bequeathed” are too constraining in the context of the opening paragraph. They imply that there is no such thing as bad or unjust law.
Agreed.
Bingo
He writes about “The doctrine of equal opportunity” but I didn’t see that he defined or stated it. It’s not clear what he’s writing about except that he has some gripes.
The literal meaning of the phrase, and how those of us who sign on to it are unwittingly helping the Left to destroy America and Western civ.
Fixed, and this would still be an improvement for many of us.
When you quit your present job and hire on in the public sector.
Regards,
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.