When you have found some sort of equality of opportunity - this can never be an absolute principle - you have reached your target. Congratulations!Unfortunately, this does not work for the liberal left and politically correct who will insist on different criteria to be applied at this point as certain groups may find themselves "under-represented". There will always be groups who are less well represented - this is inevitable. This is life. Enter, 'equality of outcome!'
If we take crane drivers as an example, this is a largely male preserve and so these egalitarian lunatics will enter paroxysms of ire that this "social injustice must be addressed." We are now so accustomed to such nonsense that we hardly notice but it is a clear tactic to undermine the social fabric. If for example, we consider the doling out of taxi licences to those of Pakistani origin, to the extent in Sheffield that a non Pakistani driving a taxi is now a rarity, I have to ask why this particular gross imbalance is not part of the stated arguments. It could not posssibly be a double standard, could it?
If the loony left get their way - as they now do in countless governmental and council institutions - even greater unfairnesses emerge. Promotions will be based, not on merit but on: gender, sexual inclination, colour, religion, non-independent school education, background, ethnicity and much, much more besides.
The real outcome is that the less deserving will receive the promotions. The incompetent will rise. The Peter Principle will be expanded. Worst of all is that those who deserve the promotions as the best are sidelined and inevitably they become profoundly resentful.
Have I seen this? Worse. I have experienced the downside first hand. Was I resentful? - You bet!
Ultimately, the only fair system is MERIT and merit alone. If that means imbalance - tough!
LINK: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/equality/
