← Back to articles
PublicOpen accessAbout 4 min read
Neuro-SemanticsNeurons

CAN ALL THINGS BE FAIR?

When it comes to fairness— equality of persons, equity in opportunity to speak, assemble, and engage in business, who would not be in favor of that?

Sign in to save this article

When it comes to fairness— equality of persons, equity in opportunity to speak, assemble, and engage in business, who would not be in favor of that? We all want things to be fair— especially to ourselves. And for those who have attained even a little bit of personal development, for others also. Being fair and equitable seems to be one of the most fundamental values built into human being — as can be observed in any pair of 4-years olds about dividing cookies.

In re-reading through Nassim Taleb’s best selling book, The Black Swan, what he wrote about fairness and inequity caught my attention.

“Fairness is not exclusively an economic issue.” Obviously, the wages people are paid, and the wide range of economic conditions in various countries is not fair or equitable. Equally inequitable is intelligence. Intelligence is not distributed equally— some have a lot; some do not. Consequently, in terms of intellectual production there is also much unfairness.

If we ask, “Are things fair in any realm?” the answer is, There’s unfairness and inequality in every realm of life. We are not equal in physical fitness, in health, social ranking, emotional intelligence, happiness, resilience, and the list can be extended indefinitely. There’s a reason for this— we are simply not equal. Instead, we are all different. We are born with different predispositions and potentials. We are born in different homes, with different parents, different socio-economic standards, etc. Even luck, chance, and probability are not fair, some get more than others. We are all unique, and as long as we are unique— things will not be, and cannot be, absolutely fair and equal.

Yet these differences are not inherently bad. Our differences, actually, can be our strength if we hold a space for respect for the differences. What we need is to set up a system that will promote equality or fairness of opportunity. This is not the same as equality of results. We can’t make that equal. Nor can any government, no matter how authoritarian make things equal. But we can provide an equity of opportunity — so that anyone who will accept responsibility for personal development— thinking, working, acting, then any person will have an opportunity to succeed.

Affirmative Action, in this country and many other countries, has attempted to make things more fair by giving some people (minorities or formerly oppressed people) a hand-up. This shifts the scales so that those who were disenfransized get a handicap for their disadvantages. And for the first generation that has generally worked. It worked for awhile. Then things change. After awhile, in the second generation, the hand-up sends a different and opposite message. It says, “You need a hand-up because you are inferior. You couldn’t make it on your own, you need this

hand-out to give you a fighting chance.” What was an equalizer, for awhile, now becomes a problematic frame that invites a sense of inferiority.

That’s because Affirmative Action incorporates a racist assumption. Namely, “You are not an equal human being. People of your heritage don’t have what it takes on an even playing field.” Psychologically this can be devastating. It communicates to a whole generation a strong limiting belief and decision. “You are a victim and that victimhood cannot be transcended; once a victim, always a victim.” It gives permission for a person to think of himself as lacking and deficient. It sets a taboo against competing on equal terms. It discourages people to think that they can merit what they received.

While Affirmative Action can work wonders for the first generation, it becomes destructive and toxic in the following generations. That’s why Affirmative Action needs a expiration date on it. In the meantime, not only the external laws and operations in society need to be enabling and empowering people, but also the culture of those formerly disenfrancised. This is where family and school values have to also change to empower individuals. The more stable the home, the more there is both a father and mother present, a strong sense of responsibility, a work ethic, the importance of education, what it means to be a responsible citizen, etc., the more both internal and external cultures truly empowers people to step up and unleash their potentials.

Affirmative Action can only take us only so far. First the legal, then the personal. Once there are opportunities for all to compete on a flat playing field, now the cultural factors come more strongly into play. Now the cultural environment of family, home, school, church, etc. will be playing a stronger influence on the next generation. The legal right to compete does not provide the personal empowerment that individuals will need to step up and to compete. This is where education and ethics will win the day. Here is where responsibility and a larger vision will enable the next generation to enter the middle class.

All of this requires cooperation and collaboration. By collaborating we can create a system that will reward hard work which produces values in the marketplace.