Equal or unequal for all?

           We live in a time and place where immigration is a very common occurrence. People immigrate for several reasons. To leave war torn countries, economic hardship and sometimes just to live in a free country where they are accepted and treated equally. Many countries even today do not provide equal opportunities for all people. Discrimination against women, disabled people, the poor etc still exists in most countries.

            “We believe strongly in the people who come to this nation. People come because their escaping war, escaping dictatorship, escaping regimes. They come to Ontario to enjoy the freedom.” (Paikin, 2011) Liberalism understands why people immigrate and create a society that supports new Canadians. They believe in equal opportunity that gives everyone a chance to be successful in life. This is what immigrants come looking for. They want to be treated equally and fairly. Hobhouse (as cited in Mullaly. 2007. p. 95) stated that Liberals implicitly connect the well-being of society to the well being of the individual. Therefore they make sure everyone has access to education, the job market, health care, social services, and so on (Mullaly. 2007. p. 98).  They also try to redistribute income and some goods and services through the tax system and/or social welfare system (Mullaly. 2007. p. 96)

            “The current western debate about immigration and asylum provides a key test for liberals in combating prejudice with prudence. The best example of policy response can be seen in Canada, where liberals’ electoral success has been notable. Recognizing that zero immigration is not a realistic policy option and that immigrants contribute hugely not only to their host communities but also (through remittance of money) to their countries of origin” (Watson. 2004. p.170). Liberalism believes in self worth and the contribution that immigrants make culturally and economically to our society. They provide everyone with equal chances and if they don’t succeed in achieving their goals it is usually because they did not make use of the opportunities presented to them, is what they stand by.

            “Liberals do not consider the possibility that some people in society, because of their social position and resources, may be in a better position to exploit these so-called available opportunities than others” (Mullaly. 2007. p. 98). As Mullaly explains, liberalism does not take into account the different social classes that people fall into, there by ignoring a huge factor that may be the cause of unsuccessful lives. He uses the analogy of a person with 50 metre headstart in a 100 metre race. A person with no head start is most likely to never catch up to the person with the headstart (Mullaly. 2007. p.98). This is referred to as “The Achilles heel of the equal opportunity”. Karger (as cited in Mullaly. 2007. p. 99) states,” The fallacy of the entire argument is that true equality of opportunity is unattainable in an unequal society.”

            So as much as liberalism would like a society with equal opportunities for all people, this is not the reality. Most people become who they are due to the impact of various social classes, cultures, economic situations and families that they were born into. These classes do exist and is something that cannot be ignored. Babies automatically belong to the social class that their family belongs to. They do not get to choose for themselves. This is a reality that liberalism does not take into account. Even though Liberalism wants to provide equal opportunities, what happens to those of us that do not have that 50 metre headstart? 

Iresha 

           

REFERENCES 

Watson G. (2004). Liberalism and globalization. Asia Europe Journal, 2(2). 167-173. doi: 10.1007/s10308-004-0084-x

Mullaly, B. (2007). The new structural social work. Canada: Oxford University Press.

Paikin, S. (2011, April 11). Khalil Ramal: Liberals and Immigration (video file). Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PnX0RNsThA