Fairness Requires Winners and Losers

Fightin Words ^ | February 11, 2010 | Walter Scott Hudson

[Walter Scott Hudson]

Thomas Sowell is currently running a blistering series in his column at Townhall.com focused on the liberal perversion of “fairness.” In his latest entry, Part III, Sowell highlights the difference between genuine fairness and the Left’s contrived variety:

People like philosopher John Rawls call treating everyone alike merely “formal” fairness. Professor Rawls advocated “a conception of justice that nullifies the accidents of natural endowment and the contingencies of social circumstances.” He called for a society which “arranges” end-results, rather than simply treating everyone the same and letting the chips fall where they may.

Sowell later evokes the example of track meets, citing them as unfair by this liberal standard for discriminating against the slow. This is a fantastic analogy. Genuine fairness is exemplified in all runners beginning at a designated starting line, following the same course, and finishing whenever they happen to. The Left’s perversion of fairness would be exemplified in all runners starting wherever necessary for all to finish at the same time. In this way, the Left’s “fairness” is fundamentally opposite of actual fairness, a rigged game, handicapped to the point of absurdity.

Much like the distinction which must be made between rights and entitlements, this accurate perception of fairness must dominate the public discourse. Head on over to Townhall.com and check out Sowell’s series “The Fallacy of ‘Fairness’”:

Part I

Part II

Part III

[Senator John Blutarski]

Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid - This is a concept that could only have been imagined by an academic or an ideologue completely out of touch with everyday humanity. Five minutes of thoughtful consideration reveals the complete social unfeasibility and bankruptcy of the idea.

A society founded upon equality of result must inevitably fall victim to its its own internal contradictions. If any effort to advance beyond the dictated norm results in penalty and handicap, while failure to reach the norm is greeted by external subsidy and support, any intelligent victim of such a twisted social system will logically reduce his personal effort to a minimum and take advantage of the external aid. If anyone desires to see the pernicious consequences of “equality of result” in action, he can examine our present welfare system or view union work rules.