equality, still a question?

Posted on Thursday 13 November 2008

I said recently that I wanted to change the blog [the Park Bench I…, the Park Bench II…]. What I want to do is pick out some questions that are worth thinking about and look into them more deeply – to flesh out the problem with an eye on what might be done to move them in a more positive direction. That’s what I was trying to do in the post, looking back [1860]… [the one with all the cartograms]. But I wasn’t clear about what problem I was thinking about up front. It was that "all men are created equal" thing in the Declaration of Independence.

Maybe the problem was in relying only on things that are simply "self evident." But even two hundred and thirty years ago, it wouldn’t have taken much looking to see that women and african americans were being excluded by the statement. "all men are created equal." One can argue that they were using the word "men" in the broadest sense, as in "Mankind," but that’s a reach – because women couldn’t vote and the slaves were not free. I don’t mean to fault them, they were doing their best in the context of their historical era. But their best was a bit more self-serving than we would’ve liked from our current perspective. So equality started out meaning class – no more Divine Right of Kings. It was a start, but not the end of the story. What they wrote turned out to be interpretable as saying "all white heterosexual males are created equal." That’s a flaw that needs clarification. I propose, "We hold these truths to be self evident, that we are all created equal," which is easy in the modern photoshop world.
Over these last few years, I’ve spent some time pondering our "fundamentals," and I’ve become convinced that these simple words contain a real flaw. Obviously, the rights of women have been very slow in coming. And the equal rights amendment, designed to clarify this point, did not pass as a Constitutional Amendment, driving home the point that this is not just a semantic question. I believe that the rights of women are more or less accepted among us. And I agree that the election of Barack Obama symbolically affirms the rights of african americans and other minorities. But our Constitution doesn’t say, "all american citizens" are created equal. And our behavior in this Iraq War makes it clear that the Christian credo, "Love thy enemies," isn’t part of the mix. We have purposefully dehumanized our P.O.W.’s – stripped them of rights to due process, trial, justice. That doesn’t sound like "we are all created equal" to me.

This is simply an anachronistic flaw in our basic principles. It has resulted in a Civil War, a Civil Rights Movement, a Feminist Movement, a Gay Rights Movement, a Torture Policy, a lot of bad things. Personally, I don’t think it’s a trivial or semantic point. I think we really need to fix it. "We are all created equal" should have no loophole, no amendments. And we need to affirm that the only legitimate way to withdraw those rights for any human being is by conviction in a court of law that holds that one is innocent until proven guilty, that offers habeas corpus, and that adheres to due process. "We, the people" means "We, all of the people."

Frankly, I personally doubt that the persistent racism/racialism apparent in the southern vote is any conscious attempt to deny that "we are all created equal." I expect it’s roots are much more firmly rooted in fear, in history, in misperception, in numerous factors – some of which are very real. But changing it from a bad motive to a more understandable motive doesn’t move it closer to a solution. Having Barack Obama in the White House is clearly a potential move towards solution, if he continues to carry himself in the non-divisive way he showed us in the campaign. But what else can be done? Certainly, the point is not to convert people from being Republicans to Democrats. I only used the Republican vote to illustrate my point because I think it did, clearly, represent in this instance the strong persistent racial divide in the South. And the problem isn’t even the racial divide itself. It’s human nature for like people to congregate. The problem is the fear-based hostility that still characterizes this particular divide. It has moved in my lifetime, but oh so slowly. And there are still miles to go before we sleep. That said, they got the next part right, "that we are endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness."

It’s easy to define the problem. It’s also easy to talk about how it should be. It’s obviously not so easy to know how to approach the problem of the persistence of the racial divisions in the South. Somehow just waiting for the generations to pass in hopes that it will wear away hasn’t been terribly effective. It seems to me that it’s time for initiatives – moves from both sides to mend this ancient wound. That’s based on my solid sense that prejudices and fears melt when individuals get together and actually know each other. The shared human-ness overwhelms powerful differences. That was the hope of school integration, but as we know, a private system of segregation via private schools, home schooling, and "white flight" neighborhoods undermined the idea. And frankly, the forced integration – while it may have been necessary – also had the down side of lasting resentments. How to approach increasing the personal encounter of races in the South remains unsolved, but certainly not insoluable…

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.