Equality of citizens is not evident in today’s society. There are many factors which have led to this harsh and undeniable reality. Physical ability which is something that cannot be controlled is one factor that causes inequality of citizens. Wealth, power, education and career paths are other factors which result in inequality of citizens. Three theorists that support this truth of inequality are Michael Walzer, Jean Jacques Rousseau and Gautano Mosca. Michael Walzer theorizes that present division of wealth and power correspond to the reality of human life. Jean Jacques Rousseau concludes that there are two kinds of inequalities in the human species. The first inequality is natural or physical and the other is moral or political. Thirdly Gaetano Mosca states that all societies are divided into two classes. One class that rules and the other class that is ruled. This is yet another example of how citizens are not equal in society. In a world where humans are born free and are suppose to be entitled to their liberty. It is seemingly apparent that this freedom is conditional and your power within your society ultimately determines your freedoms to social goods as a citizen within that society.
Michael Walzer uses the American society as a pure example of how society reflects the true inequalities of man. The distribution of success can be depicted in a bell shaped curve. At the two extreme ends lie small number citizens. The top of the bell is where citizens with money and power lie. At the bottom of the bell is where the lower classes lie. Poor and disable people have fallen into this small percentage of people who cannot succeed in life due to lack of money. Or lack of physical ability which would otherwise allow them to move higher in bell of power. Finally the middle part of this bell curve is the dense core where the majority of citizens lie. Not able to reach the top due to lack of ability or wealth, yet not quite at the bottom. They posses enough characteristics of the higher classes allowing them to move away from the poor and disable. An echo of the first bell curve is the distribution of wealth this also takes the shape of a bell curve. The first curve represents citizens’ success; this dictates the second curve representing the distribution of wealth to citizens. This bell shaped curve is so naturally depicted in United States’ society. Attributes lead to success are the key factor when looking at this first bell curve. In the United States education is present in order to distribute attributes as equally as possible. When looking at the distribution of attributes one must focus on range and variance of human abilities: Intelligence, physical strength, grace, artistic ability, mechanical skill, leadership, endurance, memory, psychological insight, capacity for hard work, morality, sensitivity and the ability to express compassion.
It is evadable that these just like other components of society are found in this bell shaped curve. What comes to question is whether these attributes echo a citizen’s income or if in fact a citizen’s income tends to reflect their attributes. The difference with the income curve is that the presence of luck plays a big factor. In life people who are less skilled often achieve greater incomes due to knowing someone in the higher end of the income poll. Something which has not been consistently seen in society is citizens’ abilities. If a citizen is able to make money then they should in fact do so. If a citizen has an ability to write they should in fact become a writer. Reality has proven that there are outside factors which often determine an individual’s ultimate success and ability to express and fully develop their talents. All these scenarios of ability rarely depict a person’s wealth. Wealth being the most important factor, due to the truth that money is the universal medium of exchange. Having wealth gives citizens the capability to purchase any and all forms of social goods. All forms of power can be bought by money. It shows how inadequate society is, because despite what attributes one may posses it has no use to them if they do not possess the ability to make money. It is a direct flaw of inequality that allows these people who possess money the ability for them to buy their own power and happiness. Whether or not a person is able or not if they have money they do in fact look as if they quite able indeed. A man may be ugly, but with money he can acquire the most beautiful wife. This subsequently suggests that this man is beautiful. A man may be dishonorable, detestable, unscrupulous and a stupid person, but money is honored and there for a man with money despite his vices will be honored. If the amount of money a person possesses reflected their intelligence, strength or moral rectitude the bell curve would dramatically change. Even then when money was based on individuals’ characteristics it still is not appropriate. This is because it is no ones right to possess all the social goods which are available to them.