Egalitarianism In Politics Of America: Negative And Positive Sides
John Rawls defines Egalitarianism is when we all have the same ethical value and treat each other equally, allowing the least well benefit. Walmart for example, the employees get a bonus depending on the store bonus and the hours you work. Some weeks the person doesn’t work that many hours. They take the average of the last 6 weeks, and decide your bonus. This allows the people that didn’t work many hours have the opportunity to receive there bonus. Instead of basing it on the full-time or part-time. Is there an extreme to the egalitarianism? Such as benefiting people with the disadvantages too much or would that be considered a different theory? Is the United States using the Egalitarianism theory when providing for the poor, since some of them have disadvantage due to disabilities and other differences?•
The strength for Egalitarianism is that it benefits everyone no matter where you are in society. It helps everyone, even the ones the least well off benefit from it. This will bring happiness to others knowing they have better opportunities because their differences are considered. It also has some weaknesses, some might try to find disadvantages they consider to have to see if they can benefit more. There all those that will work really hard for something and not get as much as they believe they should because some of the others had a disadvantage even though they didn’t work as hard. Which could lead those that worked hard not see the point in working hard anyone, since others are benefiting from their differences. You can see this dilemma in Politics.
We don’t consider or use Egalitarianism for politicians. You only see the Politicians that have connection and lots of money in the media. This makes it harder for the other politicians’ voices to be heard. Some others might be very smart and have great ideas and spent all the money on their education which led them to disadvantage. Some might just live in a really small town and not had the opportunities to get involved in politics but have great ideas. If they were had the same opportunities, their would be more ideas discussed and issues brought up. Even if they didn’t win their ideas and concerns would be noticed because they had the same opportunity to be heard throughout the media.
People from all backgrounds will have their concerns brought into consideration when a topic is being discussed. This would reduce the corruption in politics because all voices would be heard. That could be disadvantage as well, there might be some that just want attention and use the egalitarianism concept to get attention and not use it to be productive but use it to try and be famous. Which would make others uncertain if politicians are being professional or just trying to get people to notice them.
