The prevailing view of American and European countries is that of equality. There are many different people in the world, from different nationalities, different races, different genders, different sexes, and so forth, and they are all equal. The view is that any job a man can do a woman can do just as well, anything a black person can do a white person can do just as well. Thus, people say that sex, race, gender, are all irrelevant in determining the differences in people, rather these are simply social constructs that people invented and hence falsely believe in the difference between people. Therefore, if everything was perfectly kept equal, there should be perfect (or nearly perfect) equality between all kinds of people in the world. In this equalized world model there would be no wage gaps between men and women, blacks and whites, Mexicans and Asians, and so forth. There also would be no disproportionate amount of races and sexes in all jobs. But there are wage gaps and there is a disproportion in all jobs. Hence, the conclusion is that there is discrimination in the world that is preventing this equality from taking place. If there was no racism or sexism or discrimination in the world then the world will set to its natural equilibrium state with no wage gaps and the same proportions in all employments as in the total population. Thus, we must conclude there is a lot of racism and sexism in the world.
This argument is a valid argument, but it is not a sound argument. The premise on which this entire argument is founded, equality, has never been justified. Never in my life have I ever heard anyone give an argument in favor of equality. I have heard people argue for equality, but they argued for equality as a prescriptive statement, that is, that we should treat one another the same way, and I agree. But this notion of equality that we are discussing here is different, it is a descriptive statement, it is making the statement that differences between people are simply social constructs. This is the view I heard many times in college. But never have I heard a vindication of this view. It is a given that I must accept. And I refuse to accept it.
Most people, sadly, come to believe ideas for entirely wrong reasons. Beliefs should be formed around rationality, empiricism, skepticism, philosophy, and science. But most beliefs are formed as the result of superstition, authority, appeal, majority, fear, tradition, and indoctrination. The myth of equality has been accepted by people as a result of indoctrination and appeal. Originally, the myth of equality was stated as a view that had a lot of appeal to people. It is appealing and comforting to believe that the world is fair, just, and equal in every way and that it is people who perverted this equality with their sexism and racism. This is how the myth of equality became so popular. Not as a result of rationality but simply because it appeals to so many people, this version of the world is so much more comforting to believe in. Once this view gained a lot of popularity it spread down to the next generations through indoctrination. Either from their parents, or their teachers, or their professors, whoever it was who indoctrinated these students. And now we live in a world where such a falsehood is not only a prevailing view but a major view in much of public policy around us.
But I do not accept this view and openly say my strong disagreement with it. I often find myself being accused for being a racist, a sexist, and homophobic for daring to suggest inequality as the natural state of the world. I am used to this at this point, it does not bother me. Other people do challenge me for saying that. They tell me to prove that they are wrong. And to show that the world is not equal.
Who needs to prove himself? Is it me who disbelieves in equality? Or is it the one who says that equality is true? The ones who preach equality never defend themselves. They say it as if it is a given. But I would like to see justification for that view. Once I am given a justification then I can be asked for my disagreement and where I find flaw. But before such a justification can be given I cannot be demanded to give me justification first.
Nature is not fair and equal, nature is brutal and unfair. Entire solar systems can exist for billions of years and then be destroyed in a matter of hours by a passing black hole. Solar systems that possibly had sustaining intelligent life on them. Natural selection only cares for struggle and competition, not fairness nor equality. Why then can we possibly believe that humans, who evolved from nature, evolved in equality, rather than evolved in a brutal struggle and in cruelty? The notion of equality is simply not compatible with the known world.
Even if one was to propose a God who instead superseded in the development of life, the problem of equality is still not addressed. In most of the world religions God does not believe in equality. Take Judaism for example. Judaism teaches that men and women are different. They have different roles in life, Judaism might say that God loves them just as much, but they are made for different roles, that is, they are unequal to one another. Equal in their love to God, but unequal in their tasks in life.
The liberal versions of Judaism which insist that not only does God love men and women just as much but he is okay with them having the same role, such as women Rabbi's, run into the obvious problem of assuming a God exists in the first place. A position that has no evidence whatsoever.
It is therefore foolish to believe in equality if the natural world itself does not care for equality. It would truly be miraculous if it turned that every kind of race and sex in the world turned out being equal despite the inequality of nature. This could be true, I highly doubt it, but it may in fact turn out being true. The only way to justify such a grand proposition would be to test the world around us to whether or not it confirms this equality theory. But we cannot test such a theory because the world is filled with inequality almost everywhere. Of course, the proponents of equality will insist these inequalities are the result of discrimination. But if they use such an argument then their reasoning is circular. The argument of theirs foolishly becomes: equality exists but we cannot test it because of inequality, but inequality exists because of discrimination, and discrimination must exist because of equality in the first place. Clearly, this is a circular argument.
In absence of any kind of rationality in favor of equality it is therefore reasonable to reject equality as a myth.