We need EQUITY

Post Reply New Topic

We all like being equal. However, we don't want to be purely the same. By equality, we mean that we can have diversity but we're all able to be provided something we want, just in different ways. That is the basis of "equity", the true equality of humankind for equity is the "Unity in Diversity". Diversity exists but opportunities are the same regardless. Equity is good for the reason that it is not just about equality, but also being fair so that equality is not abused.

Dude, you really have a lot of ideas. Have you ever thought about writing a paper? About what you think are good qualities and systems of justice, and the logic behind them.I'm really a little interested.

The best argument for equity is the illustration of a grown person and two children watching something. To achieve equity, you give the youngest child two boxes in order for it to see the game. The older child can have one box and the adult doesn't need any. That is how you solve height differences with a reasonable and fair solution with boxes. The other example are people reaching out for a tree with the same method applied.



What does this mean is that equity has diverse approaches but all are done with the same goal, the goal to unite and maintain equality while equality would simply dismiss the height issue and give all the people one same box which would still result in inequality unless a fair solution is given to solve differences. I was specifically introduced to this equality vs equity thing from a YouTube channel called "After Skool" a philosophy channel which got to me with their video called "Why Smart People Believe Stupid Things?".

Speaking of writing papers, I have done in the past. While at first controversial, I was learning something from the criticisms and I am still continuing on writing some interesting stuff in my own papers as I continue working on my third way communism.

Just so no one tries to gaslight their own definitions of 'Equity' . . .

equity (n): (a) The state or quality of being just and fair; (b) Something that is just and fair; (c) Justice achieved not simply according to the strict letter of the law but in accordance with principles of substantial justice and the unique facts of the case.

These are not new ideas, having been put forth in one form or another by anyone speaking out against the abuse of authority and classism.  Even Jesus of Nazareth preached these principles.


Be the instrument of the changes you want instead of merely posting rants against things you don't like.

Well someone has to know that. So, sharing the views with the public is the first step toward getting the changes you want because it requires the masses to rise up against the old and replace it with the new. And good job in providing the definition of equity and how it has been since the times of Jesus.

Maybe it's a minor point, but where in the world did you get your definition of the verb "gaslight" from, Fnord?

Psychology Today provided this one:

Gaslighting: An insidious form of manipulation and psychological control.  Victims of gaslighting are deliberately and systematically fed false information that leads them to question what they know to be true . . .

So posting false definitions of 'Equity', and trying to pass them off as the real thing would be a form of gaslighting.

I did say that equity is fair. You only added that this "substantial justice" thing achieves it. Also, gaslighting? I was gaslit for nearly 19 years now and only then I am now beginning to question the validity of this reality. Since I joined this forum, I do must admit it was rather newbie of me but then as emotions played with me at the time, I felt the need to ask for help and all I got is that I have to either accept or piss off.

Well, at this point, I don't even know who can I trust. Everyone is different and I respect that but what I can't believe is how everyone is working so hard to become different than the others. On one hand it is helpful and unique but on the extreme it just doesn't help. This is WP, a forum for autistic people which is dominated by liberals.

The equity of this forum itself and the equity in society is absent in my eyes because I never get to enjoy the fairness like you all do because the current "fairness" does not give any equality to it, therefore no equity. I have tried numerous times but the only way I could get attention is through notoriety. I admit, it was shameful of me to try and make people bawl their eyes on controversial takes I had but I just was facing issues of my own that I had no one to rely to. I didn't wanna make my family suspect me of being insane so I masked the outside and focused on the Internet where I can express freely without being sent to a mental asylum.

But then, bad omen attacked. Firstly, a conflict with a close friend, the end of a friendship, the heartbreak, and the grief. Now it is existential dread that I have for my existence is worth living but unworth to be proud of except that I should live and die naturally so I can be granted equity in the afterlife. I just have to face life and then retire in the afterlife. Time will heal. I'm sure time will heal all of it.

I don't know why but I really feel like this is the wrong planet. Who would trust me? Who would understand me? I may be of this revolutionary fervor phase but there is an explanation to it. The explanation is that I was pushed to the point of entering a revolutionary fervor and demanding a radical change take place and put an end. But then, I felt like I was going to have some level of fairness when I became friends with another social outcast until I couldn't accept the one thing that apparently was worth like gold to her. After we broke terms, I was pushed to the point of N O R E T U R N . After I realized that even other social outcasts wouldn't want me, I began questioning the validity of reality and everything.

All I saw was betrayal and dishonor. I wanted to be like the rest. But they somehow got it better. They're better in coping from the effects of the pandemic, they're better with maintaining friendships. We were all at least good in our childhoods but everything started to differ with teenager years and while I was unaware, I still enjoyed the times until now. Now I don't know who is real to me. For equity is gone. Destroyed, disestablished. Even people older then me fare better mentally. They survived a war and despite the fact that they were in a bloody war that destroyed Yugoslavia and its Brotherhood and Unity, they cope better.

I wish there was Yugoslavia once more so I can at least find myself in a place where there is equity. Times under Tito were better even for social reasons. I don't care anymore. Nothing makes sense to me. There is clearly a cultural and linguistic barrier. If you want equity, then better start dehomogenizing and appreciate diversity at once! The only way you learn about true equity is from Yugoslavia and Tito!

When we want equity. We want it as in "Brotherhood and Unity" for that helps as "Unity in Diversity". Mainstream culture is homogenizing everything to create its own "equality". I am Yugoslav and I too can be a human being because I don't have to be an American or a Western citizen in order to prove myself worthy of their mainstream (and same goes for Sino-Russian mainstream). Seriously, I feel no equity in this forum simply for the fact that the majority is mainstream Western and does not help at all.

Maybe we, the minorities of this WP forum should just form our own forums cause this is way too biased to the Western mainstream rather than the global equity of all.

OK I kind of see what you were driving at now. But the public nature of the idea we're being "fed" would seem to mitigate any risk quite nicely. Gaslighters usually have little power if they can't isolate their victims, or so I would have thought.

Sad to say the original post doesn't make sense to me. The syntax is too ambiguous. I guess English isn't the OP's first language, and I sympathise with him, but that doesn't help me to understand his ideas.

To see if it would help, I watched the video. There are many ideas in it, some of which I agree with, e.g. that the concept of general intelligence has limited meaning and that aptitudes for defined tasks are much more objective things. But the video's main idea, which seems to be that more intelligent people are more prone to bias than idiots, I don't agree with, even if a few papers have been published saying it's so. If intelligence isn't a meaningful concept, how is it valid to say it correlates with anything? I think what he means by intelligence is education or the idea some people have that they're smarter than the average bear. Personally I think it's just that education, while it can be helpful in avoiding biased thinking, doesn't necessarily help in that respect. And there's a known fallacy - I forget its name, it basically says that if a person is deemed an expert, more credence is given to his/her assertions than it's logically justified to give. And of course there's a lot of snobbery surrounding well-educated people. But overall I don't think education increases bias.

Appeal to [False] Authority: "Appeal to authority fallacy refers to the use of an expert's opinion to back up an argument.  Instead of justifying one’s claim, a person cites an authority figure who is not qualified to make reliable claims about the topic at hand.  Because people tend to believe experts, appeal to authority often imbues an argument with credibility."

The claim that intelligence and education make a person more biased is false.  All they really do is make a person more informed and more able to reason.  Thus, such people are more resistant to brainwashing, gaslighting, and propaganda, which are used by people who have failed to properly assimilate into the current social order -- the disaffected, the dissidents, the under-educated, and similar people who are afflicted with the Dunning-Kruger Syndrome (e.g., they do not know what they do not know), and who essentially do not understand what they are talking about.