Equality and liberty Student’s Name Instructor Institution Course Date Liberty is the portrayal of oneself in its entirety. This is, without a doubt, the one notion that one cannot own unless it has been experienced and shared by others. It is the concept of thoroughly presenting one's thoughts, expressions, lifestyles, preferences, desires, and behaviour to the universe, irrespective of time or distance. Many argue that liberty should be practiced with some constraints placed by a democratically organized society to ensure the community's overall safety, respect, wellness, and morality. The central concern now is whether these restrictions are for the common good or are authoritarian. Liberty demands everyone's independence, but not at the expense of unrequited moral policing. Equality, on the other side, is accepting someone as they are. The question of how much to give and to whom will always be contested in the context of equality. The notion is founded on hierarchy, a sliding scale of privileges and responsibilities, purity and pollution, and the weaker and more substantial(flew,2018). Now, who is the authoritative source for determining the answers to these questions, and how can equality be achieved in a way that benefits everyone? This is a topic that has piqued the interest of successive generations. Equality is a manner of treating individuals equally; yet, this does not make one a follower in authoritarianism. Individuals of all classes, castes, creeds, genders and geographical locations should be represented fairly. However, equality should be applied to those fundamentally equal persons regarding their characteristics and interpretations. For example, a teacher should be treated the same as other instructors; physicians should be treated the same as their equivalents, and so on(Capaldi & Lloyd,2016). Inextricably related are the principles of liberty and equality. Liberty is meaningless in the absence of equality(Corlett,2016). The same scene is depicted from several angles. . Although there is a significant relationship between liberty and equality, some political theorists say none. For example, both Lord Acton and De Tocqueville, ardent supporters of freedom, found no link between the two attributes. Liberty and equality had become mutually incompatible and completely antagonistic for them. Lord Acton says that the pursuit of equality rendered the pursuit of liberty worthless. Modern political philosophers reject the views of Lord Acton and De Tocqueville. Professor H.J. Laski correctly stated that "liberty and equality are antithetic objectives to those as passionate for liberty as Tocqueville and Lord Acton." It's an unexpected outcome. However, it derives from a misunderstanding of equality in both men's instances. "Throughout the seventeenth century, individualists misconstrued the term "liberty." Instead of emphasizing the government's embrace of Laissez-Faire, they placed a premium on economic equality. Adam Smith was a firm believer in this point of view. Individualists felt that capitalists and labor leaders should compete without fear of retaliation. They do not want the government to play a role in economic decisions(flew,2018). For example, the government asserts that statistics show that a particular island has the lowest annual crime rate. When 90 percent of the population is Muslims, who are firsthand eaters of beef and for whom intake of alcohol is a 'Haram,' the authorities seek to eliminate beef consumption and increase alcohol consumption(Berlin,2017). They also want to partition the island into four areas for development at the expense of resettlement, which would disrupt the island's cohesiveness and settlement patterns. Why aren't such regulations enforced in other Hindu-majority areas? Why aren't pork and cow urine prohibited? Apart from a community perspective, this restricts the inhabitants' autonomy and reacts to an inequity they must contend with at the expense of their morals and ethics(Corlett,2016). The government's latest IT guidelines, which aim to keep track of all messages sent and received by users, are a direct threat to one's right to privacy as well as one's liberty. If social media businesses do not follow the rules, they will be held liable for any controversial statements made by their users. In a similar situation, a member of the ruling party may come up and make any comment they want against the beliefs and faiths of individuals they disagree with; they can talk openly and freely against the opposition, but not the other way around(Capaldi & Lloyd,2016). Is this simply because power and righteousness are inextricably linked? Can't the governing party post insulting words, and under what morality can they monitor an individual's chats? It is evident from the above reasons that liberty and equality go hand in hand. We can't talk about equality without freeing someone, and liberty is a hazy concept without equality. I recognize that the gleaming idea of a finish may not be as excellent as one could like since some things are going on that many of us will never comprehend(flew,2018). When citizens of the country appear to be frightened by their power to determine their destiny when give and take is the only way to proceed without leaving us with options, I hope they remember that liberty is the expression of oneself. Equality is acceptance of the other's self. Those two words are the cornerstones of democracy, and we are all obligated to safeguard them as citizens. Political freedoms confer political power on their owners, which is ubiquitous, oppressive, challenging to resist, monopolistic, and final, as we will demonstrate. Political rights are strategically helpful in achieving equality because those deprived of them are socially degraded to the degree that others enjoy them. Political rights are expressively valuable for attaining social equality because the state fails to publicly recognize disenfranchised people's ability to utilize political power properly. Political rights would not be positionally and expressively essential for attaining social standing if they did not provide political power(Capaldi & Lloyd,2016). However, because they bestow such control, being refused the right to vote and run for office causes additional injury to one's equality beyond the extremely high cost of being forbidden political authority. Even though the two are inextricably linked, liberty and equality are complex. Adopting one notion of freedom and equality over another complicates their ties, although specific issues may be resolved. First, their strong resistance is based on the same liberalism tradition as Hayek's philosophy. It is emphasized by libertarians - a set of political theorists that value liberty at the expense of purposely compromising equality. The anarchical notion that any encounter is an arbitrary interference that results in a condition of dominance is at the root of this tendency. Even libertarianism, if they want to be logical, must embrace equal liberty for everyone. In their case, they would strive for the maximum possible amount of freedom for everyone, or possibly market-related freedoms, but always for all. Otherwise, they'd be committing the error of limited universalism(flew,2018). Inequality jeopardizes liberty in two ways: directly, by limiting the freedom of most people, and indirectly, by provoking irrational attempts to restore equality. These inclinations put democracy in jeopardy(Berlin,2017). A concept stated previously poses a direct danger to democracy. Power is a relationship or a tension between two wills rather than a thing. Anything that impacts this relationship or pressure has an impact on power. A woman's attractiveness, for example, imparts power, at least over those who are drawn to her sort of beauty. To be wealthy implies having some power over the conduct of others who rely on your riches for their existence, and vice versa. Assume, as common sense suggests, that everyone in society is perpetually entangled in varied and discontinuous power relations, such as those found in the family, businesses, and other institutions. In the case of any individual, these relationships can be flipped; a person can be dominating at home and overwhelmed at work. Now, each person can be assigned a power index, which combines and summarizes all of the positive and negative power relationships he is involved in. It is not impossible to construct such indices empirically. So, let's say we have them created. Then everyone might be compared to every one other. We'd have a scale for a society that ranged from more to less regarding its members' abilities. We may draw a theorem from these premises: the distribution, or curve, of power is identical to the distribution, or turn, of liberty. This is a reasonable conclusion. Because liberty is defined as an assortment of choices, autonomy, and involvement, and power is defined as an unbalanced tension between two wills, the dominated will is less accessible than the dominating will(flew,2018). The tension between intentions also implies that their liberty can be indefinitely mixed in a spectrum ranging from perfect reciprocity to utter subordination of one person to the other. Individual freedoms are sometimes confused with human rights, and the two concepts are frequently used interchangeably. Human rights, such as the right to free expression and the prohibition of torture, are essential concepts that allow one to live a decent life free of prejudice and violence(Capaldi & Lloyd,2016). Civil liberties are the individual freedoms offered by a state to its inhabitants to safeguard such rights. Human rights apply to everyone in the globe, according to the law. Even though the UDHR is the foundation of numerous international accords, it has no legal standing. It was created in the aftermath of the horrors of Globe War II when governments worldwide determined to ensure that such crimes would never happen again. On the other hand, every country has its own rules concerning what its citizens may and cannot do(Capaldi & Lloyd,2016). Liberty and equality may be reconciled by recalling that both (liberty and equality) are methods to realizing the full potential of individual individuality on the largest feasible scale(Berlin,2017)." Any attempt to enforce a dead sense of belonging and social equality is disallowed, as the emergence of a varied range of alternative outcomes needs a considerable lot of liberty. Both are beneficial to one another. "Liberty and equality are not in contradiction or even distinct, but different facts of the same ideal," states Herbert A. Dean. Indeed, because they are identical, there can be no disagreement about how or to what degree they are or may be connected; this is unquestionably close, if not the most satisfying, answer yet developed for a recurring issue in political philosophy."( Corlett,2016) Modern democratic views are built on the twin foundations of equality and liberty. We think they underpin our loyalties to our beloved political institutions as well as our citizen-to-citizen relationships. References Berlin, I. (2017). Two concepts of liberty (pp. 33-57). Routledge. Flew, A. (2018). Equality in liberty and justice. Routledge. Corlett, J. A. (Ed.). (2016). Equality and liberty: analyzing Rawls and Nozick. Springer. Capaldi, N., & Lloyd, G. (2016). Liberty and equality in political economy: from Locke versus Rousseau to the present. Edward Elgar Publishing.
