Last week, I wrote about how diversity, equity and inclusion based on an unconscious bias is just another way of teaching critical race theory (CRT). The one word I want to focus on this week is “equity.”
Although “equity” sounds like “equality,” it is totally different. The radical left jumped on this word, as well as “diversity” and “inclusion,” because they are a lot less threatening than CRT. These Neo-Marxists explicitly reject equality. To them, equality represents “mere nondiscrimination” and provides “cover” for white supremacy and oppression.
What exactly is equity in the context of this CRT agenda?
Merriam-Webster’s simple definition of equity is “fairness or justice in the way people are treated.” There is no problem with that, but what exactly is fairness? How do we define justice? If these concepts are not absolutes, but shaped by each individual’s worldviews and experiences, then the definition may be a perpetually moving target.
In my view, equality means equal treatment under the law and equal opportunities to succeed. Everyone has a shot. Some are less fortunate than others based on many factors, but the law will not allow discrimination. Some may have to work harder than others, but the opportunities nonetheless exist.
Equity, on the other hand, focuses on the outcome, and what you have gained in life. It looks at the end product and then redistributes it in what the left calls an equitable fashion.
Equality provides the means, but equity determines the outcome. The CRT proponents call it social justice, but it is merely another word for socialism, and is that what you want your children learning in school?
According to an opinion article written by Bradley Gitz, in the traditional Marxist approach, inequalities were unjust consequences of the private ownership of property that defined capitalism, but in the new Marxist approach, racial disparities are the unjust consequences of racism and the broader system of white supremacy.
Traditional Marxists would have the government use extreme coercion to rectify inequalities and allocate resources consistent with the goal of the classless society. To the Neo-Marxists, led by the Biden and Murphy administrations, equity is prioritized in all public policy areas in order to more equally distribute wealth and services between racial and ethnic groups in proportion to their respective percentage of the population. In both situations, the government exists primarily to take resources from some groups and give them to others.
Gitz concludes by saying that equality of outcome constitutes the ultimate goal in each form of Marxism, as opposed to the historically liberal understanding of equality before the law and in terms of rights and responsibilities. Equity contradicts and undermines those more traditional understandings of equality because the end requires that the government and public policy deliberately favor some groups over others.
Our system of government was founded on the freedoms that were set forth in our Declaration of Independence. It gives us the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, equal opportunities under the law, and protection from an oppressive government, all without being told by our leaders what we deserve, so that our resources can be reallocated.
Opportunities exist for all Americans, but freedom in a capitalist society will never balance the outcome. This freedom has been the driving force of our nation for 250 years, and it is because of this freedom and the success that we have had as a nation that we are the number one target of the Neo-Marxists.
Freedom will always result in the inequality of outcome, but equality of outcome can never be accomplished without extinguishing freedom.
ED. NOTE: Monzo is an attorney in Court House, where he has practiced law for 32 years. He is a graduate of Temple University School of Law, where he also received a master’s of law in taxation. His practice areas are in real estate, commercial transactions, taxation, and health care. He is also president of the local chapter of the Christian Legal Society.
