Freedom to End Up Different

By Ronald Meinardus

MANILA -- Ideological fuzziness has become a hallmark of politics. Instead of accentuating ideological positions, politicians deliberately demonstrate vagueness. This, their advisers argue, prevents the politicians from alienating strategic interest groups crucial for victory in elections.

In spite of this leveling out, ideologies haven't disappeared all together from political discourse. If one listens carefully, ideological biases still play a role in partisan politics.

Arguably the most popular political catch phrase of all is "freedom." Invented by the classical liberal thinkers to counter authoritarian rule, freedom as an objective today is claimed by all political camps -- liberals, socialists, conservatives, to name the most important ideological mainstreams. I don't know a major political grouping that would declare it is opposed to freedom. Even tyrants and terrorists claim they are fighting for freedom, although their deeds lead in the opposite direction.

Following freedom in the row of popular and catchy ideological concepts is "equality." For many, freedom and equality belong together. Some say these principles are like Siamese twins.

In reality, though, freedom and equality are in conflict with one another. From time immemorial, philosophers have racked their brains to reconcile these objectives and model a society that guarantees equality without at the same time curtailing individual freedom. A convincing blueprint has yet to be found.

Simplified, two approaches exist in what is a seemingly endless debate. On one side are those espousing socialist thoughts. Confronted with the choice between freedom and equality, socialists tend to opt for equality.

Historically, this prioritization has been fatal for that great ideological movement. Socialism has failed not only because of the breakdown of the planned economy; in many countries, and particularly in Eastern Europe, socialist regimes were swept away by angry masses led by the desire for political freedom and other basic rights.

In contrast to their socialist opponents, liberals, when confronted with the alternative of freedom and equality, opt for liberty. This may explain why they are at times accused of being selfish and lacking a social conscience. But it is wrong to say liberals oppose the notion of equality. The very concept of equality before the law is their invention and has been the battle cry of the liberal movement for many centuries. Equality before the law stands at the center of the rule of law, and has become the cornerstone of liberal democracy.

Debates pertaining to freedom and equality necessarily have philosophical ramifications. In a liberal view of life, all men and women are created equal. They are distinct individuals who by nature have different talents, capabilities, potentials and inclinations. It follows that if one leaves such individuals to themselves, the result will be that they develop differently. Naturally some will do better than others.

In line with this, free people are never equal. While, in the liberal view, they are created equal and enjoy equality before the law, as they go along in their lives they will end up in varying conditions. Given human diversity, equality of outcomes is not practicable.

"The only way in which you could have even the remote chance of equalizing income and wealth across society is to put a gun to everyone's head," writes Lawrence W. Reed, the head of an American think tank.

Countries whose governments tried to implement economic equality by decree -- such as Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge or North Korea -- are the worst human-rights violators and dictatorships. Freedom-lovers abhor the Utopian society in which all are supposedly equal economically. The objective is not equality of results, but the creation of conditions so that all members of society have equal opportunities.

Enter politics. Arguably, the most crucial policy area with an effect on equal opportunities is education. Therefore, the demand for equal access to education for all members of society is a cornerstone of every liberal agenda. As education enables human development, it stands at the beginning of all human and societal progress.

Promoting education is also essential in the "fight against poverty," which is just another expression for overcoming social inequalities. Today, this task is more important than ever before. Social inequality, lack of opportunity and hopelessness have become the breeding grounds for political radicalism and violence. The stability of many nations, yes the world at large, to a great extent depends on whether governments and societies manage to close the widening social and economic gap without curtailing basic freedoms.

Dr. Ronald Meinardus was the former Resident Representative of the Friedrich Naumann Foundation in the Philippines and will leave Manila late September for a new posting in the Middle East. He writes a blog at www.myliberaltimes.com