The author of an Open Forum published in The Star on April 6th provided a classic example of how an oversized federal government can be effective in suppressing personal freedoms and initiatives. The Forum title, “Equity training in schools is important,” seems to set the stage for a modern lesson in social correctness.
After three lengthy paragraphs extolling the virtues of progressive politics over conservative failures, paragraph No. 4 gave me the needed insight for some problems with equity. True to form, that paragraph begins with, “So why is equity training important?” and then offered the following Google scenario:
Lacking the price of admission, three kids went to the ballpark hoping to see the game from outside the fence. The tallest was able to see over the fence without standing on a box. The next tallest was able to see the game standing on one box, but the shortest needed to stand on two boxes to peek over the fence. If treated equally, each would have to been GIVEN a box to stand on, but that would have meant two could see the game, but one could not. Since one’s height is a fate left to the gods, the equitable solution would have been for the boxes to be ALLOCATED in a way that all three boys got to see the game.
Note the words “given” and “allocated” (highlighted by me) suggesting that the boxes should be supplied by some other member or class of humanity, possibly by a federal government or a ruling class. Obviously, if the boys were big enough and old enough to watch and understand the game, they were also wise enough to devise their own plan to see the game without paying admission, rather than depending on others for total control of the process.
Left to their own devices, they might have found their own boxes, apple crates, chairs or ladders or they might have climbed a nearby tree to see over the fence. Some determined young fellows may have found a place to look through the fence or use binoculars, but they could have found a way without a need for the proper supply of government approved equity boxes.
Less the confusion and bureaucracy of self-righteous decisions through politics, the boys may have chosen a better, safer, and more enjoyable method to accomplish the same thing and enjoy the freedom to control their own lives in the process. And by the way, one box each would have worked fine if the tall boy was willing to give his to shorty.
My point is that oversized governing bodies and ruling classes may regard their need for equity as your marching orders. This limits constitutional freedoms for individuals and gives the ruling class a free hand to force their sense of equity using working class tax dollars. And don’t confuse their definition of equity with your definition of equality.
Ruling class radicals see equity as a sense of fairness that results in GIVING and ALLOCATING for the sake of human sameness and equality of outcome. Our, Constitution, Mr. Sears, supports individual freedoms and incentives based on equality of opportunity.