The Mirage of Equality
The pursuit of so-called “equality” amounts to self-deception and inevitable stagnation. Every time we think we are moving closer to that goal, it simply disappears back into nothingness.
Written By: Piet Du Plessis
More than thirty years after the fall of the apartheid regime, South Africa is still searching for so-called “equality” — which, like a mirage, simply vanishes back into nothingness every time we stare at it and think we are getting closer to that goal.
There is no shortage of explanations for why South Africa does not experience equality, but are these wide variety of explanations of any fundamental use? Before we try to answer that question, let us first give a broad overview of the “explanations” for the stubborn persistence with which “equality” continues to elude South Africa.
Here are some of the main supposed arguments: Colonialism. Apartheid. A compromise transition in 1994 with too many concessions to the former oppressors. The continuation of the apartheid era’s unjust material gains and the accumulated reservoir of knowledge built up through education and experience from the previous dispensation. Insufficient redistribution. Ongoing racism and racial discrimination. Neoliberalism. Capitalism. Deficient transformation. Widespread corruption. Cadre deployment. Incompetence in the broader state sector. New-regime self-satisfaction. Inappropriate or wrong government policies and ideological mindsets. Policies that exist but are not implemented, or are poorly implemented. Elitism. A weak education system. Inadequate restoration of land ownership rights.
Readers will surely be able to add more reasons, excuses, or arguments that are put forward for the existence of the elusive phenomenon referred to as “equality” in South Africa. All those reasons, excuses, and arguments, however, rest on the assumption that “equality” is indeed possible. Or even desirable. But is it?
Inherent Inequality
I will now set out why the pursuit of so-called “equality” amounts to self-deception and inevitable stagnation. That is why I referred in the introduction to “equality” as a mirage: every time we stare at it and think we are moving closer to that goal, it simply disappears back into nothingness. And that is also a good thing, as I will explain below.
My hypothesis is that “equality” is simply irreconcilable with what evolutionary biology teaches us: the well-known evolutionary process of natural selection is based, among other things, on variability, difference, and diversity. This is precisely the opposite of so-called “equality.” Nature has never tried to make everything and everyone “equal.” On the contrary, inequality is an integral part of what we observe in the natural world. This does not exclude humans as the pinnacle of creation. It is built into our genetics; and for good reason: pursuing “equality” is only a few steps removed from the artificial dismantling of natural human strivings for achievement, improvement, and progress — right down to the ultimate level of mediocrity.
Forced attempts to bring about so-called “equality” do not encourage achievement, excellence, creativity, and the other human qualities that have made humans the pinnacle of creation. Unfortunately, not everyone can wear the proverbial “crown.” We can only strive for it, and that keeps us true to what we are genetically made to be. That is also a good thing, because now everyone who pleads for the right to “equality” and insists upon it is motivated to also want to wear a crown.
Imagine we make everyone equal by ensuring that everyone, for example, wears identical red berets. How long after that will any person still aspire to wear a crown instead? Or are we willing to betray our human genetics?
My highly simplified metaphor of the red beret versus the crown can of course be extended to numerous real-world examples of the damage that the pursuit of “equality” can inflict on humanity — and indeed does inflict where the illusion of it is not understood, or mostly does not want to be understood. South Africa is a good example. Since the concept of “equality” is a human construct, it is only fair to also reflect on the human reasons for the emergence of the concept. It is partly born out of guilt feelings. It has also been developed as a tool to try to defuse conflict that arises from envy. But despite our best and most honest efforts — or contrived efforts that are merely window dressing to pretend that everyone can be equal, for the sake of peace — we are not successful.
We are not successful, and will never be able to be successful, because we are chasing the impossible. We act dishonestly, knowingly or unknowingly, by pretending that “equality” is achievable. One of our ulterior motives is to try to conceal our own privilege — privilege that we have often earned through merit, but which can all too easily be portrayed as if it were acquired at the expense of others.
Those who realise that “equality” is a mirage, however, do not feel compelled to pretend that it is an attainable goal. They are rather honest about the fact that inequality is the norm. This of course causes discomfort and guilt feelings among those who propagate utopian living environments. They then convince themselves that their efforts to bring about “equality” are indeed possible. That is why they often just continue chasing the mirage, even if they know or suspect that it is futile. It provides relief from guilt feelings, but is ultimately nothing more than self-deception.
Mere Normative Emotional Life
We in South Africa have largely and badly fallen for the appearance of “equality.” It is quite simply unattainable, but it does serve a purpose in trying to bring about normative, man-made “justice” by preaching “equality.” Therefore “equality” will always be pursued, even if it is merely a human invention.
Let us rather call what we do in the name of so-called “equality” what it really is: mostly the mere artificial redistribution of what some have managed to build up better than others. Naturally this has merits, but then we must not leave the recipients of the redistributed yields from the givers — or more often rather the yields of those from whom it is taken away under state coercion to be redistributed — with the false impression that it will bring or needs to bring “equality.” Socialist experiments that have failed to bring about so-called “equality” must surely tell us something. I conclude with the well-known George Orwell quotation from his well-known jewel of a book, Animal Farm:
“All animals are created equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”
Let us just acknowledge that even Orwell’s pigs noticed the contradiction in the supposed pursuit of “equality.”
Piet Du Plessis is a retiree with a long history of applied socio-economic development. A liberated Afrikaner who has moved beyond self-flagellation and believes that he has been freed to live out his cultural pride and values, and to proclaim them openly when appropriate.