If you caught yesterday’s podcast, I was assuming that Lady Gaga would use her halftime performance to preach about the virtues of equality, compassion, and love, especially how that pertains to the current political atmosphere. Fortunately, she avoided politics altogether, but the commercials had another story.
There were a few subtly politicized commercials, from Audi, Budweiser, 84 Lumber, and Airbnb, which promoted diversity, equality, and acceptance. The most politicized was that of Airbnb and the #weaccept hashtag that was trending on Twitter by halftime. All of these commercials which aim to put their organization in a favorable public opinion all miss one crucial aspect – equality is a myth.
Equality has become some sort of buzzword, used almost exclusively by people on the left. Usually, this is done to virtue-signal to other people, that you do care about those less well off, and that behind all the smoke and mirrors we are all equal. But some critical thought is needed to realize that this cannot be true, and if by some kind of sorcery it became true, we would rue the day it did.
From the most micro to the most macro level, equality simply cannot exist.
Let’s look at the most micro level, and see if equality actually exists. The most micro level would be that of one individual, over an X amount of days. If we were to study this individual, we would realize that some days he’s much more productive than other days, and vice versa. In other words, the same individual is not even equal to him or herself on different days! If equality is impossible to achieve on such a micro scale, it becomes even more troublesome when extended over a macro level.
What would our world look like if our goal as a society was equality? Besides the impossibility of such a feat, and the emotional turmoil that would accompany not being able to accomplish it, the world would be dangerously boring. Let’s pretend said equality is our goal, where would we stop?
Obviously anyone making any more money than anybody else would be completely off-limits, that would have severe negative impacts to the economy as a whole. Anyone who had even a slightly bigger house, or even something as trivial as a different colored house would be condemned. Different TV sizes, shapes, quality, price points, and etc. would be a big no-no as well. But what would the people look like?
Would there be a certain height or weight limit set, in which people who were either too tall or too short, or too fat or too skinny, could expect to either have some limbs cut off or added, or some fat sucked out or added? Would there be a certain eye color that would be considered more equal? Surely, equality cannot exist with some people having brown eyes, while others have blue, and still others have green. But what of blind people? It’s true that some people are gifted with eyesight in both eyes, but it’s also true that some people have no eyesight at all. Some sort of “eyeball lottery” would have to take place, in which people with both eyes would be subject to having one of their eyes forcibly removed and given to a blind person.
If you stretch equality out to its logical conclusion, many other treacherous conclusions such as the “eyeball lottery” would have to be reached. If an idea doesn’t make sense in either the micro or macro level, then it is high time to abandon such ideas.
Humans are always guided by ideas, whether they are true or false. Sometimes highly exaggerating an argument can reveal if it is really virtuous, and if we, as humans guided by ideas, should follow the claims of said idea. Equality is one of these false ideas that we erroneously think is virtuous.
The truth is, inequality of wealth, skills, eye colors, etc. is what is actually virtuous, and leads to a life full of excitement, learning, aspiring to be successful, and many other ideals which has influenced modern western civilization to become such a great place to live today.
Just ask yourself, would Hell’s Kitchen have benefitted if Daredevil wasn’t blind, but had someone else’s eye?