Thoughts on Inequality and Justice

Cute, but grossly inaccurate and intentionally so.

Note the change of language between talking about inequality regarding opportunity and equality as providing assistance to get the same result. These are not the same thing at all. In fact, one must discard any pretense about respecting diversity if the goal is to produce equity. I suspect few people would actually notice the easy shift to talking about equity as a synonym, yet have been inundated with this assumption.

Equity does not mean the same opportunity with assistance and tools but to produce the same results. This is a logical fallacy known as the Disparity Fallacy, that disparate results means inequality of opportunity! This simply not true. Humans with diverse attributes, traits, and abilities never have, do not now, and never shall produce equal results. To think otherwise is simply an assertion that does not comport with reality.

So Justice does not mean equal access as this little graphic presumes; it means, basically, fairness in treatment across a diverse population. And so when social policy is aimed at achieving identical results regardless of the individual’s diverse attributes, traits, and abilities and does so n the name of fairness, we don’t get Justice: the synonym for the dehumanizing legal and political framework necessary to obtain equity is properly called totalitarianism.

“Equity programs deliberately stack the deck in favor of certain identity groups and occasionally explicitly attempt to reduce the numbers of others (famously, Asian students at Ivy League universities like Harvard), which most people understand as intrinsically unfair, if not a bad idea that places some irrelevant characteristic like demographic identity ahead of relevant characteristics like competence in hiring/appointment decisions (see also, meritocracy). Indeed, the “diversity, equity, inclusion” suite was introduced as a deliberate work-around for Affirmative Action.” (Source)

LikeLike