MDMAlliance on 09 December 2013
| Aielyn said: Please clarify the definition of "Economic Equality". If you mean "Everyone has the same economic capability", then that would be communism, and is not really compatible with Democracy. If you mean "Everyone has access to the same potential for economic success", then I'd say that it's entirely compatible, and if the system is set up correctly, it will be the necessary outcome. But no democracy has been set up correctly, yet. The key difference between the former and latter cases has to do with the difference between rewarding harder (or smarter, or more important, or more beneficial) work and treating everyone as equal independent of their contribution. Both are different from what we have right now, which is where economic capability is tied to parents' economic capability, social circumstances, etc. A kid in a poor family has far less chance to succeed than a kid in a rich family if both kids have the same skills, dedication, etc. |
How would one manage to make an economy and society where something like that would exist, though? The amount of resources you would need would be high, and a type of authoritarian society (maybe even totalitarian) would be needed to create conditions for this kind of society, which is inherently non-democractic. Also, who would determine what is actually more valuable between harder or smarter work, if both are equally beneficial? There are many questions on how you would make this kind of "democracy" work. There is also a question of the politics themselves, as they can have many indirect consequences on the economy and the "economic equality" of the state.
