The Advantages of Inequality By William Nicholas 1893
Inequality has certain practical advantages connected with it. The objects of society are more conveniently accomplished by means of men with different faculties and aptitudes, than they could be by men who were all alike.
In a shipbuilding yard, or in a cabinetmaker’s shop, there are various instruments, and many different sizes of each sort of instrument. As a rule, the more perfect the assortment of tools, the more rapidly the work will be done, and the work turned out will probably be better work than it would be if the appliances of production were less complete. If any person went into that yard or shop and insisted that all hammers and files and planes should be exactly equal, he would be told that each instrument had its use, that each one was fitted for its specific work, that there was a work the large hammer could do which could not be done so well by the small one, and a work the small hammer could do that could not be done so well by the large one.
So is it in carrying on the work of the world. Men with various faculties and with various degrees of the various faculties are needed to work together for the common good. There are men with certain aptitudes and tastes, and having these they can with ease and pleasure to themselves perform important services to society, the doing of which would be almost intolerable to others.
It is necessary that we should have sailors; our complex civilization could not be continued without their aid. Now we find men who have a love for a seafaring life; they are more at home on the ocean than on the land; they have a natural taste and aptitude for the life of a sailor. There are others for whom such a life would have no attraction. A life spent quietly in the country, or amid the vicissitudes and emulations of commerce, or in literary pursuits, or in scientific investigation, would gratify their taste.
Society needs men who will, not reluctantly, but cheerfully, adopt the various pursuits and callings which are necessary to the very existence of a civilized community. It is necessary that we should have men with such faculties that they will efficiently serve society in those different positions. Now we find men with “gifts differing,” and hence there is an adaptation between the wants of society and the provision for these wants in the existence of men with different tastes and faculties. It is as evidently for the convenience of society that there should be variety in men, as that there should be variety amongst the tools in a workshop.
When Socialists cry out for equality, and say that men ought to be placed sometimes at one work and sometimes at another, or, at any rate, that all ought to be regarded as equal, they entirely overlook the basis and needs of society, and the fundamental facts of human nature.
We cannot, indeed, imagine how the business of the world could be carried on if equality, in any real sense, were established. Let us suppose that we have to work a railway company—with the exception of an army, perhaps the best example of organized labour—on this principle of equality. At every station every porter is equal to the stationmaster, every stationmaster is equal to the traffic. The traffic manager is equal to the chairman of the board of directors; at the same time he is not superior to any porter at any one of the stations. If this equality be realized by all, no one who knows human nature can suppose that discipline could be maintained for twenty. One man’s opinion is just as good as another’s. "Why should I obey my equal?" says the porter, when “Why should I obey my equal?” says the stationmaster, when the traffic the stationmaster gives orders. manager gives directions. Distracted counsels, plans, and officers perpetually changing, unseemly conflicts would inevitably ensue, and the fate of a house divided against itself would fall upon that unhappy company, whilst many disasters would occur to its unfortunate passengers.
In order successfully to conduct any important organization, there must be some authority or authorities which, having a wider vision and a knowledge of facts unknown to others, must have the right to decide and to command; whilst the others must have faith in the wisdom of the controlling power, and be ready to obey. Does any one suppose that an army could be successfully led through a campaign unless the soldiers felt that it was
Theirs not to make reply,
Theirs not to reason why,
Theirs but to do and die?
No complex organization could be worked on the principle of equality. Inequality is an ultimate and absolute fact in human nature; and any system which daes not recognise this is not true to the facts of the case, and therefore is a system essentially unsound and impracticable.
The inequality existing in society has a moral purpose; it is a means for the moral training of the human race.
The idea of equality appeals to envy—the vice that Longfellow calls the vice of republics, and that John Stuart Mill calls the most anti-social of all the vices. Envy looks with an evil eye and a malignant heart on all superiority. It has played an important and a baleful part in the history of states and of individuals. It has led to repression, to slander, to conspiracy, to robbery, to murder, It led Cain to slay Abel, Saul to hunt David as a partridge upon the mountains, and the chief priests to deliver Christ into the hands of the Roman governor. It has often been a bar to progress, but it has never helped an individual to be happy or a state to be great.
This evil passion is the moral basis of Socialism; To soothe envy there must be equality. This pandering to it is vain. Fix the hand of your barometer at “set fair,” yet the storm will come.
Assert that all men are equal, yet the inequality that exists in human nature will manifest itself, and envy will rage. It were as wise to build a city over a slumbering volcano, as to erect a social system on envy as its moral basis.
Inequality has certain practical advantages connected with it. The objects of society are more conveniently accomplished by means of men with different faculties and aptitudes, than they could be by men who were all alike.
In a shipbuilding yard, or in a cabinetmaker’s shop, there are various instruments, and many different sizes of each sort of instrument. As a rule, the more perfect the assortment of tools, the more rapidly the work will be done, and the work turned out will probably be better work than it would be if the appliances of production were less complete. If any person went into that yard or shop and insisted that all hammers and files and planes should be exactly equal, he would be told that each instrument had its use, that each one was fitted for its specific work, that there was a work the large hammer could do which could not be done so well by the small one, and a work the small hammer could do that could not be done so well by the large one.
So is it in carrying on the work of the world. Men with various faculties and with various degrees of the various faculties are needed to work together for the common good. There are men with certain aptitudes and tastes, and having these they can with ease and pleasure to themselves perform important services to society, the doing of which would be almost intolerable to others.
It is necessary that we should have sailors; our complex civilization could not be continued without their aid. Now we find men who have a love for a seafaring life; they are more at home on the ocean than on the land; they have a natural taste and aptitude for the life of a sailor. There are others for whom such a life would have no attraction. A life spent quietly in the country, or amid the vicissitudes and emulations of commerce, or in literary pursuits, or in scientific investigation, would gratify their taste.
Society needs men who will, not reluctantly, but cheerfully, adopt the various pursuits and callings which are necessary to the very existence of a civilized community. It is necessary that we should have men with such faculties that they will efficiently serve society in those different positions. Now we find men with “gifts differing,” and hence there is an adaptation between the wants of society and the provision for these wants in the existence of men with different tastes and faculties. It is as evidently for the convenience of society that there should be variety in men, as that there should be variety amongst the tools in a workshop.
When Socialists cry out for equality, and say that men ought to be placed sometimes at one work and sometimes at another, or, at any rate, that all ought to be regarded as equal, they entirely overlook the basis and needs of society, and the fundamental facts of human nature.
We cannot, indeed, imagine how the business of the world could be carried on if equality, in any real sense, were established. Let us suppose that we have to work a railway company—with the exception of an army, perhaps the best example of organized labour—on this principle of equality. At every station every porter is equal to the stationmaster, every stationmaster is equal to the traffic. The traffic manager is equal to the chairman of the board of directors; at the same time he is not superior to any porter at any one of the stations. If this equality be realized by all, no one who knows human nature can suppose that discipline could be maintained for twenty. One man’s opinion is just as good as another’s. "Why should I obey my equal?" says the porter, when “Why should I obey my equal?” says the stationmaster, when the traffic the stationmaster gives orders. manager gives directions. Distracted counsels, plans, and officers perpetually changing, unseemly conflicts would inevitably ensue, and the fate of a house divided against itself would fall upon that unhappy company, whilst many disasters would occur to its unfortunate passengers.
In order successfully to conduct any important organization, there must be some authority or authorities which, having a wider vision and a knowledge of facts unknown to others, must have the right to decide and to command; whilst the others must have faith in the wisdom of the controlling power, and be ready to obey. Does any one suppose that an army could be successfully led through a campaign unless the soldiers felt that it was
Theirs not to make reply,
Theirs not to reason why,
Theirs but to do and die?
No complex organization could be worked on the principle of equality. Inequality is an ultimate and absolute fact in human nature; and any system which daes not recognise this is not true to the facts of the case, and therefore is a system essentially unsound and impracticable.
The inequality existing in society has a moral purpose; it is a means for the moral training of the human race.
The idea of equality appeals to envy—the vice that Longfellow calls the vice of republics, and that John Stuart Mill calls the most anti-social of all the vices. Envy looks with an evil eye and a malignant heart on all superiority. It has played an important and a baleful part in the history of states and of individuals. It has led to repression, to slander, to conspiracy, to robbery, to murder, It led Cain to slay Abel, Saul to hunt David as a partridge upon the mountains, and the chief priests to deliver Christ into the hands of the Roman governor. It has often been a bar to progress, but it has never helped an individual to be happy or a state to be great.
This evil passion is the moral basis of Socialism; To soothe envy there must be equality. This pandering to it is vain. Fix the hand of your barometer at “set fair,” yet the storm will come.
Assert that all men are equal, yet the inequality that exists in human nature will manifest itself, and envy will rage. It were as wise to build a city over a slumbering volcano, as to erect a social system on envy as its moral basis.
No comments:
Post a Comment