2002级英语教育(1)班　陈芳芳

       Social equality is the eternal goal that human beings have been pursuing since the ancient times. This can be well proved by the famous statement from The Declaration of Independence:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these, are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." But the reality has turned out to be incompatible with the appealing ideal. A variety of factors have forced the statesmen of different times and nations to recognize the truth: social equality is only a beautiful dream.

       As James Fennimore Cooper put it, "Equality, in a social sense, may be divided into that of condition and that of rights. Equality of condition is incompatible with civilization, and is found only to exist in those communities that are but slightly removed from the savage state. In practice, it can only mean a common misery." Thus we may make the same classification accordingly by dividing social equality into economic equality, political equality, educational equality and the equality of other social aspects. As we know, no matter in developed or developing countries, economic disparity is still there. There is a huge gap between the poor and the rich. In textbooks, all of us learn that "achieving common wealth" is the ultimate objective of the social civilization. However a careful examination of the social reality will awake us from the dream of an armchair strategist.

      Firstly, people's income is unequal. To some extent, this is the source of all the existing problems. After all economic basis determines the superstructure. Some common examples may help us understand this point. People with high income usually have more special rights than the poor. They live excessive lives. They enjoy some luxurious entertainments that poor people can only enjoy on the TV programs or in the storybooks. What makes the poor frustrated is that the poverty that hounds them all their life often humiliates their dignity. In a magnificent hotel the shabby clothes of the poor (if they are allowed to enter this paradise) may form a striking contrast with the fashionable suits of the rich. Even the most insensible people will sense the existence of the gap between the two worlds—the poor and the rich. This is the tragedy of the uneven distribution of wealth. In a society with this distribution system, can we hope that all people will be equal? No, absolutely not.

      Secondly, our social status is also unequal. According to the amount of money we hold or the power we control or the position we occupy in officialdom, we are divided into different social classes. Upper classes are always superior to the lower classes. Workers have to bow to bosses, subordinates to their superiors, and servants to their masters…These are the scenes of unfairness. Anyone with reason will admit that social division of labor itself makes social equality a dream. 

      Thirdly, unequal chance of development such as education also smashes the possibility of social equality. Because of the different economic conditions between the regions, some children may enjoy better education than others. And the difference of education determines the difference of their future development. In most areas of the countryside in China, children have much less chance to receive formal school education than the children in cities. As a result, the malignant circle makes the country children fall farther and farther behind on the way of personal development. It is doubtful that all those born equals can some day have the equal opportunity to make themselves equal!

       Lastly, the value of one’s life is different because of the difference of wealth he possesses. It's no need for us to point out that the wealthy can get a better medical treatment to protect their lives while the poor have to die because of the lack of medical protection built up by money. No human right advocators will deny that the life is equally valuable to all people, but it is only true when lives are not compared with each other on the basis of the wealth of their owners.

       And Charles de Montesquien's statement may serve to sum up my point of view: "In the state of nature...all men are born equal, but they cannot continue in this equality. Society makes them lose it, and they recover it only by the protection of the law." But the problem is that people do not have equal right to make the law!

（批阅：李荣宝教授）