Human beings are clearly not equal in any real sense. Consider any physical attribute or mental ability and you will observe the huge range of differences between people.
One of the dimensions along which people differ is the things that give them pleasure. To the mathematician the greatest pleasure may be sitting in his study thinking of a new theorem, to the racing driver it may be driving a formula 1 car at 200mph. The great diversity of abilities and interests is one of the things that makes our world so interesting to inhabit.
We are all different, all capable of achieving different things and we all get our pleasure from life in different ways.
However, Socialists declare that inequality is an evil that must be stamped out?
They don’t mean that all inequalities should be stamped out, they just mean that inequalities in wealth should be stamped out, because inequalities in wealth are a great evil.
Such a great evil in fact that it justifies them taking wealth from those who earned it, by force, or threat of force, to enable it to be re-distributed more “fairly”.
If one man is adept in the ways of business, he will acquire more wealth than other men. This will lead to envy from some less adept men, and the socialists cry that it is not fair.
Yet, if another man is particularly attractive, he will acquire more female admirers and sexual opportunities than other men. This will lead to envy from less attractive men, yet the socialists are silent on the fairness of this!
If another man is particularly intelligent, his views and opinions will be more highly regarded than those of other men. This will lead to envy from less intelligent men, yet the socialists are silent on the fairness of this!
If another man has great charisma, he may be elected to higher political office and wield more power than other men. This will lead to envy from less charismatic men, yet the socialists are silent on the fairness of this!
Any facet of human ability has some people who will excel and some who will not. Excellence in any one of them brings rewards of a different type, sometimes money, sometimes social status, sometimes sexual opportunities, sometimes a place in the history books, sometimes political power.
These rewards are valued differently by different people, some seek money, some fame, some popularity and some power as their highest goal.
So my questions for the socialists are:
1. If all inequality is unjust, why do you only focus on wealth?
2. If inequality isn’t always unjust, why is inequality of wealth unjust?
With respect to the second question, It cannot be that making everyone equal in terms of money would equalise enjoyment of life. To some, like the mathematician, or the politician, their greatest pleasures in life are attained with little or no money, while for others such as the racing car driver or the art collector, without large amounts of money their pleasures cannot be enjoyed.