Liberty vs Equality

[Rush Limbaugh]

I wasnt sure if I should put this here or in ethos but since Im starting with US history I put it here

This is the eternal struggel. Equality representing the left and Liberty the right.
Which is more important? The founders picked Liberty above all else.

Equality vs Liberty The View From 1776

Equality is what Freiderich Hayek, Nobel-Prize-winning economist, famously called “The Road to Serfdom.” Equality must be imposed upon society, because people are born with differing talents, energies, and ambitions. Absent artificial government restrictions, some people inevitably will become wealthier than others, some people will develop literary and artistic talents, many people will prefer the active life of sports, etc.

Liberty is the principle that led the colonists to go to war with the British crown in 1776. No one had the slightest notion that equality was the objective. A recent declaration by Walter Cronkite that the Constitution guarantees equality is sheer ignorance. The colonists simply wanted to be left to govern themselves as they had been doing for the preceding 154 years. What liberty does offer us is equality of opportunity, based on talent, energy, effort, and moral character.

[Shaun]

Liberty. But it's obviously not black and white. Some forms of equality are necessary, such as anti-discrimination, etc.

[Dr. Croccer]

Both. Equality is better though.

[Maverick]

Both. Equality is better though.

Which is more important? The founders picked Liberty above all else.

No contest. Inequality is natural and a smaller government is far superior to a nanny state that systemically imposes equality on society. It all depends on what your priorities are, maybe we would all be happier living in a commune eating noble lies for dinner but I think what we have now is much better with all its imperfections.

[Shaun]

No it isn't.

[Dr. Croccer]

Yes it is. Factory workers in the 19th century were free to do what they wanted but were forced to work for fourteen hours on end because they were treated unequally.

[Shaun]

So what are you trying to say?

[Rush Limbaugh]

That everyone should be forced to work 14 hours on end because that would be equality

[Dr. Croccer]

So what are you trying to say?

That equality is better than liberty.

Liberty has rarely been under attack in modern times, It made sense 150 years ago when slavery was everywhere. Slavery today is extremely rare and mostly in third world countries. Liberty is a rather old term to use in the modern world. Liberty is well-integrated in most countries and is again, rarely threatened. Equality, however, often is. It's more fragile than liberty, something we have had for centuries whereas equality was introduced countless times and didn't work well untill the 20th century and even there and even now, even in western countries it sometimes is limited.

Your just showing how liberty wins everytime. Equality follows freedom not the other way around. People are not equal.

Thanks for making me laugh, Rush.

Rush, please. Liberty rarely follows itself. Take a look at the French, Russian Iranian, and Cuban revolution. In a lot of the cases that people liberated themselves or got liberated they quickly got ruled by some dictatorial regime, sometimes even worse than the first one.

Same goes for quite a lot of ex-colonies.

Liberty gaven over time was the more safe and apparently, succesful way. It's quite amazing to think that we developed from nations where serfs and proletariat made the majority of the population with no rights at all to nations where there is little poverty (thanks to hefty economic safety nets) where every average Joe can become a politician if he is motivated and works hard enough to achieve it.


Well, in some cases that is. Apparently people aren't equal.

If anything liberty and equality go hand in hand in several cases. You get liberty with equality (19th century workers) but it appears it isn't the other way around. After the French Revolution, people were liberated from the king but that didn't stop Montesqieu and his buddies from decapitating everyone who was ''an enemy to the revolution'', which was pretty much everyone, including eavhother. Freedom didn't cause equality, it was the entire opposite. The Jacobins were just as bad as the French aristocracy, possiby even worse because they killed everyone who wasn't deemed fit in their eyes.

Or perhaps the Bolsheviks, that didn't offer liberty but simply changed the tables on who was repressing who. Kulaks, clergymen and the aristocracy were massacred on mass. And after and during Stalin's rule, 5% of the population ruled the other 95% and treated as slaves. The sad thing in that case was that, after Stalin, people weren't forced to work, they simply had to. No work = no money. The people were free to not work in most cases but simply couldn't do it. There was no hefty economic safety net. Add the fact that the 5% that ruled you could arrest and sometimes execute you. Talk about inequality. Or slavery. Another two things that often walk hand in hand. To that, equality and liberty are both required to create a stable nation.

[Shaun]

Sorry but thats not true

If you are rich you are get less punishment compared to a poor person who comitted the same crime
because you can afford the better lawyers.

And if your parents are rich , you get the better educatio
because your parents buy you the necessary education
even if you are to dumb to spell your name.
and you will also get a top job.... just because of the family

someone with poor parents will never have these chances even if he is a genius, because the parents can't afford the education.

so giving the poor the same chances is important for a society.
that doesn't mean to treat everyone the same
but it should be more important what potential you got for your chances
and not how huge the fortune of your dad is.

Here in the UK the poor are given as much chance as the rich. For example, the government pays all education up until 18 and then grants and stuff can be given.

That equality is better than liberty.

But it simply isn't. I'll have my freedom first, please.

[Rush Limbaugh]

Rush, your whole thread title is worded in a way which constructs a spectrum with liberty on one side and equality on the other, giving the idea that they are polar opposites.

You can infer that of you like. My premise and the founders is that liberty leads to equality.

so giving the poor the same chances is important for a society.

Thats where equality of opportunity comes into play. You have to have liberty to get there.

Rush, please. Liberty rarely follows itself.

How can it. Equality follows liberty. I didnt say Liberty follows Liberty.

Slavery today is extremely rare and mostly in third world countries

Its alive and well in the US its called income tax.

Take a look at the French, Russian Iranian, and Cuban revolution. In a lot of the cases that people liberated themselves or got liberated they quickly got ruled by some dictatorial regime, sometimes even worse than the first one.

They didnt free themselves. hey merely followed wacked or socialist leaders and got what they deserved. Equality.

Everyone but those in charge are miserable

If anything liberty and equality go hand in hand in several cases.

Lets make this simple. Liberty and Equality are like ying and yang. They are polar opposites but to have balance you need them both. The point is you must be free to gain equality. There is no other way.

[gbausc]

Just a radical stab at this:

Liberty is equality. It is one of the few equalities granted by the American constitution.

We also have equal rights, granted by "our Creator (We hold these truths are self evident), and among these are , Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

1.The right to live
2. The right to liberty
3. The right to pursue happiness

We are not guaranteed equal outcomes or equal happiness, merely the right to go for it, if we so choose. Many don't want to pursue happiness. They want someone, or government, to give it to them. Happiness cannot be given. It must be gotten for oneself.

A billion bucks dumped on a child at the age of 10 will not make that child happy.

But if a young person is industrious and creative and gets an idea in his garage about making computer software that others would want someday and sticks with his idea and pursues it, well he just might become the richest and most beneficial employer in the world, and benefit billions of people's lives in the process.

That kind of freedom and opportunity is available to free people everywhere, and nowhere moreso than in the USA.

Dave

[Dr. Croccer]

You can infer that of you like. My premise and the founders is that liberty leads to equality.

Then that's a stupid premise because the US is the last place in the West where you'll find liberty.

How can it. Equality follows liberty.

Based on..?

I didnt say Liberty follows Liberty.

Because I said that.

Its alive and well in the US its called income tax.

Comparing paying taxes to forced prostitution, child labour and selling humans is simply absurd.

They didnt free themselves.

Really.

So every revolution beside the American one (which really wasn't a succes either) isn't a liberation? In all those cases the people liberated themselves from some sort of repression. For a (short amount of) time they were free.... untill someone took over because someone took over or they gave it to someone who abused it. So, again, no. Equality doesn't follow liberty, on the contrary, liberty more often causes inequality.

hey merely followed wacked or socialist leaders and got what they deserved. Equality.

Wow. Do I have to repeat myself? A system where self-elected politicians ''elect'' a president and use 99% of the population as a sandbox for their communal economic shots in the dark isn't and I repeat, isnt equality. I'll keep repeating this simple fact untill you understand it and shut up.
Equality was the ultimate goal and the ideal of the 1% who were in charge, but that obviously failed mainly due to our humanity.

Everyone but those in charge are miserable

Speak for yourself.

Lets make this simple. Liberty and Equality are like ying and yang. They are polar opposites

Way too simple. Saying that Liberty and Equality are polar opposites is simply retarded. Oh wait, I get it now. Liberty = American only and we all know that America = Democracy and Equality = EVIL SOCIALISM!!!1111! = COMMUNISM!!!11111!1ONEONE.

but to have balance you need them both.

Like I said, but, again, equality is the more needed because, again, you can have equality without liberty because liberty is a silly term in modern context. I'm still not sure what you are refering to: literal liberty or additional freedoms? Literal liberty, like I said before, is a silly term in modern context. It is rarely threatened in contrast to equality. In many cases people have liberty but aren't free because of inequality. Because they are repressed, economically. They are free to do nothing but they can't. If they don't work they die. Out of starvation. Whilst the Generalissimo is feasting on buffets bought with tax money. You can have liberty and still be a slave. It doesn't work the same with equality. Take a look at the end of the USSR. Shortly after the fall of the Wall the Russian mafiya took over in Russia, funding ecomonic fatcats that ferry over to Istanbul and make business deals with blood money. They were the real power in Russia. The government was almost powerless and almost didn't involve with the people. The people had no power, there was alot of inequality and the few that stood up against the mafiya got killed so there wasn't much freedom either. After the Mafiya was cleared up for the most (still not sure how) there was far more equality and with it, liberty.

The point is you must be free to gain equality. There is no other way.

Some proof of this might actually be nice. It's nice to have you fantasizing about it but I would like to see some working example of it.

[Ramashan]

What liberty does offer us is equality of opportunity, based on talent, energy, effort, and moral character.

A system can not work efficiently without a balance of both these issues. Because liberty, as is even stated above, does not work unless there is equal opportunity. This is when the whole equality thing comes into play as one of the posters already has said, you need to have laws in place that doesn't allow society to give more opportunity to one race or gender over another.

Also, the issue with the 14 hour workers back in the 18th and 19th century is that the system was set up to defend the employer and not the employee. So, how does this lead to liberty when you are not free to speak out against and your treatment without the police or national guard coming out and forcing you back to work.

Yes, you could quit, but if all the factories run that way and you need to feed your family, then what choice do you have, what liberty do you save. I suppose then its your choice to starve to death.

So i think the quote above needs to read:

What liberty does offer us is fair equality of opportunity, based on talent, energy, effort, and moral character.

[Shaun]

Also, the issue with the 14 hour workers back in the 18th and 19th century is that the system was set up to defend the employer and not the employee. So, how does this lead to liberty when you are not free to speak out against and your treatment without the police or national guard coming out and forcing you back to work.

It doesn't. What would help is the liberty of freedom of speech, freedom of expression (so they could protest) and freedom to strike.

[Ramashan]

What would help is the liberty of freedom of speech, freedom of expression (so they could protest) and freedom to strike.

Sure, but that's not how the system was set up. Sure on paper it was supposed to work that way, but in practice it was a hinderance to the economy and wealth of those in power there for was suppressed and strikers were either beaten or imprisoned until it got so out of hand that it was in the nations best interest to do something about it.

And even then there wasn't protection of equality of opportunity until well past the middle of the 20th century.

[Rush Limbaugh]

Sure, but that's not how the system was set up.

Because they didnt give the workers freedom but the workers had equality aiong themselves. You cant have any type true equality unless you have liberty first. Its a no brainer. You can only have equality of opportunity and thats where it should end. Equality of opportunity equals Liberty.

[Ramashan]

but the workers had equality aiong themselves.

Not really, women were not seen as equals to men and blacks and asians were not seen as equals to white europeans even within the work place and the unions.

You can only have equality of opportunity and thats where it should end. Equality of opportunity equals Liberty.

Sure, but there's not and there never has been and there wouldn't be without laws forcing people to provide equal opportunity no matter race or gender. So you need both in place for the system to work.

So, my answer is, you one can not truly exist without the other. And each to its own is doomed to failure.

[Atterdag]

Equality, in the sense that all children should be given the same premises for making most of their own future.
Liberty, as the freedom to pursue, from that position, what they want their future to be.

[Rush Limbaugh]

[QUOTE]Not really, women were not seen as equals to men and blacks and asians were not seen as equals to white europeans even within the work place and the unions.[/QUOTE\Pssst they didnt get to work

Sure, but there's not and there never has been and there wouldn't be without laws forcing people to provide equal opportunity no matter race or gender. So you need both in place for the system to work.

The constitution is all I need. All laws stem from it here. The founders had it correct.