Jean-Jacques Rousseau was an extreme supporter of equality within a society. Rousseau essentially believes that human vice and malice is a direct result of inequalities within a society. Rousseau thinks there are two forms of inequality. The first is natural inequality such as physical differences and the ability to use force. The second is moral inequality which would mean differences in wealth and social status. The problem of inequality for Rousseau has essentially evolved from the natural inequality to the moral one.
Rousseau believes that the moral inequality can be eliminated within a society and thus nullify the effects of natural inequality. Rousseau states “it is that the fundamental pact, rather than destroying natural equality, on the contrary substitutes a moral and legitimate equality for whatever physical inequality nature may have placed between men, and while they may be unequal in force or in genius, they all become equal by convention and by right.”
Karl Marx was a proponent of equality within a society, and had problems with the moral inequality, as described by Rousseau, that was apparent in society. According to Marx, equality is necessary to achieve certain goals in a society, such as free and equal participation in political activities. Marx also believes that the society is responsible for making sure this equality exists. Marx was against the inequality brought about by the age of industrialization, stating that as a result of industrialization, wealth was merely concentrated in the hands of a select few who owned the factories and equipment, the bourgeoisie. The moral inequality that existed between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, Marx’s term for the working class, would be responsible for continuing problems for any society. The only way to once and for all abolish these problems would be to destroy the rift between the classes. Marx believes that communism would be the only way to establish moral equality within a society.
Friedrich Nietzsche was a staunch opponent of equality, and argued against the value of equality in his writings. Nietzsche, who obviously was in favor of the aristocracy, essentially believed that the concept of equality and its application to a society was an impediment and stunted the growth of individuals within a society. Nietzsche instead preferred the concept of freedom, one that allowed a citizen to either achieve their own place in society, one that was not necessarily equal to that of another within the society. In his writings, Nietzsche makes distinctions between the “noble, mighty, the high-placed and the high-minded” and the “lowly, low-minded, common, and plebeian.” Essentially, Nietzsche believes that people within a society are going to compete freely for power and, naturally, noble and mighty people will win the competition and become rulers of human society, because they are more advanced than the simple commoner.
Having studied the thought processes of the aforementioned philosophers, one can apply their thinking to several modern issues such as affirmative action, campaign finance, and pornography and come to conclusions concerning how they might react to or speak about one of these issues. For instance, the concept of affirmative action would be supported by Locke, Rousseau, and Marx, since all of these philosophers supported a society based on principles of equality, particularly socioeconomic equality, which affirmative action programs are supposed to promote. For Locke, affirmative action programs would ensure that all citizens would “be equal one amongst another without subordination or subjection.” For Rousseau, affirmative action programs would help eliminate human vices such as envy and jealousy brought by eliminating the problems in society that cause these negative feelings to arise. For Marx, affirmative action would be a means for members of the proletariat to combat the oppression brought about by the nobility. It is quite possible that Marx would not agree totally with affirmative action programs because they would not due enough to entirely topple the upper class from its pedestal. Freidrich Nietzsche would oppose affirmative action programs, and would argue that it would be the responsibility of the strong members of a society to arise and assume their place within the society, without help from the government.
The present system of campaign finance would be agreeable to Nietzsche because the present system allows those who have achieved the most riches to predominantly have the greatest impact on the American political system. He would not support programs that allowed those with lesser economic capability to receive aid from the government or another institution in society to aid that candidate’s cause. Marx would not favor the present campaign finance system due to its lack of equality; Locke and Rousseau would each hold a similar stance on the issue.
Finally, on the issue of pornography, all of the above philosophers would support the individual’s right to do as they please. Nietzsche and Locke probably would be the most likely to support the right of the individual to govern themselves on moral issues, given their stance on the concept of freedom for the individual within a society.
In conclusion, the concept of equality has evolved from one that just entailed political rights and abilities to vote, to one that includes socioeconomic issues. Society has evolved to the point where people now demand equal opportunity and equal lifestyles and can base their desires on the thinking of the aforementioned philosophers, save for Nietzsche.
The Second Treatise on Government
pg 269
The Second Treatise on Government
Chapter II
Pg 269
Of the Social Contract
Book 1
Pg 56
On the Genealogy of Morality
Essay #1
Pg 12
The Second Treatise on Government
Chapter II
Pg 269