Why would *anyone* be against egalitarianism?

user equality of opportunity is not the same thing as equality of outcome.

All people arent equal, deal with it

Thebmouse utopia and experiment showed that "who" is just as important a resource as "what". Egalitarianism is literally impossible and just drags everyone down to the lowest common denominator.

People are obviously not equal in their capabilities, but they should be equal in rights and opportunities. Anything else just leads to ashitty society filled with corruption and nepotism.

How can people truly ever have equal opportunities without equal networking? Reputation gets you jobs and contracts, and can't be evenly known or distributed.

But this don't change the fact equality of outcome is a form of egalitarianism.(or a way to achieve it)

The concept of "equality" is a lie. It is a search for the lowest common denominator and its pursuit will destroy every superior race, nation, or culture. In order for a plow horse to run as fast as a race horse you would first have to cripple the race horse; conversely, in order for a race horse to pull as much as a plow horse, you would first have to cripple the plow horse. In either case, the pursuit of equality is the destruction of excellence.

Humanism is for children and the godless.

I just want people to be enough on the same playing field that if you fail, it is genuinely your own fault.

>Ramblings from a frustrated dago aristochrat

Equality does not exist in nature and equality of opportunity is but a lie. We might be more intelligent than others, but we are still animals and we have to abide to natures laws.

Capitalism?

How can people have anything resembling equal opportunities if you decide from the start that it's impossible?

No one is proposing to ignore gravity.

I think you did not understand my previous comment.

There is no equality in nature. Thus believing that humans are all equal is a lie, and every biologist will tell you so. Believing in equality is a denial of natures basic laws. As it is with ignoring gravity, we will all jump to our death if we ignore these basic truths.

The reason why you think that is that egalitarianism is so pervasive in our society that people can't be philosophically charitable at all towards anti-egalitarian philosophies.
Marxist often say that "It's easier for people to imagine the end of the world than to imagine the end of captialism" but capitalism isn't even remotely has pervasive into the contemporary zeitgeist as egalitarianism.

This is pretty spooked. Humans have the ability to posit the very conditions under which choices are made. Nothing about that someone transcends natural law. You can appeal to nature to justify literally anything.

I do not understand your counter argument very well. Please elaborate.

I'd like to show you an example of how the belief in equality can lead to disaster. Let's take the denial of I.Q. differences between people of European descent and those of African descent. European Americans have an average I.Q. of 103, while African-Americans have an average I.Q. of 85. If you whole-heartedly believe that the only differences between black and white people are superficial, than there should be no socio-economic differences between the races, but there are, and they are quite significant. If all are equal, and European Americans are doing much better than blacks, than they must be cheating, many African-Americans believe because they belief in Egalitarianism. That is the root of racial hatred.

>spooked

Nice catchphrase stirnertite, I bet you consider egalitarianism compatible with self interest and egoism, right? but history shown us, humans are opportunists and take advantage of any opportunity or weakness in every system. in the end is expected egalitarianism societies will be forced to fragment or begin to form hierarchies.

Believing that whites are all doing better because they're cheating is about stupid as believing they're all doing better because of higher IQ or merit, and attributing the entire socio-economic difference between the races to racial differences is the actual root of racial hatred. Making policies based on such ridiculous notions leads to disaster and inefficiency no matter how you justify your bias. Just a few decades ago people proposed mass-sterilization of the more "negroid" Irish because it was believed their poverty was due to their genetic inferiority and they'd never be able to perform like other Western countries without culling millions from their genepool.

Because some people have picked up an actual science book once or twice

Thinking whites are inherently better leads to complacency, blaming others for failure, and excuses. It's pretty much the 'soft men leads to hard times' part of that meme.

But IQ is very highly and positively correlated with academic and professional success. It's also highly and negatively correlated with violent crime. You do know that, right?
How can you expect two groups consistently and indisputably separated by one standard deviation in average IQ to perform equally well in a society and culture built by the higher IQ group? If you think IQ is not all important, and is not mostly hereditary then you are factually wrong.

Financial success is largely determined by ones I.Q. and work ethics. I am not proposing to sterilize bad members of society. You are projecting. And I agree, believing that Whites are doing good because they are cheating is stupid, and that's why stupid people aka African-Americans believe in it. I am sure you have heard of the term "institutionalized racism", pushed by cultural marxists and BLM members, where they point out socio-economic differences to prove the existence of this term and white privilege.

Sorta, but crony capitalism kinda throws a wrench in that.

There are a lot of things in nature that are shitty for humans. We are in a post-natural society, technology has grown to the point that we can ignore the natural.

By this logic we shouldn't build robotic legs for people who lose their natural ones.

>cultural marxists

And opinion discarded.

I dont decide it any more than I decide gravity. It's literally impossible to have exactly equal opportunity. One person will always have a factor outside of their control that gives them an advantage over another.

>believing equality is a meme is the same as advocating for mass sterilization

Slow the heck down

Because egalitarianism at it's end state means a literal crippled retards opinions are worth as much as an able bodied political science major, and that can create issues

>Because egalitarianism at it's end state means a literal crippled retards opinions are worth as much as an able bodied political science major

Yes user, that's how voting works. That guy who digs ditches for a living, his vote is worth exactly as much as the vote of a billionaire.

Technology is not a fight against nature, the opposite is true. We acknowledge the laws of nature to use these for the advantage of our species. A bridge would collapse if we were to ignore the laws of nature.

>Just a few decades ago people proposed mass-sterilization of the more "negroid" Irish because it was believed their poverty was due to their genetic inferiority and they'd never be able to perform like other Western countries
This is a thing that never happened
Except the billionaire has the money to fund whatever party he wants and the ditch digger doesn't, so there's inequality to begin with, and whenever a union gets involved it's suddenly muh gommunism

We ignore plenty of laws of physics when building a bridge. Opinion disregarded.

We disregard physical laws which have nothing to do with the stability and construction of the bridge, but those which do, we do not ignore.

And I am still waiting for you to refute my argument I made previously, which is that financial success is determined by one's I.Q. and work ethics, which you claimed was foolish.

>We disregard physical laws which have nothing to do with the stability and construction of the bridge, but those which do, we do not ignore.
Yes we do. We ignore plenty of realistic material behaviors because it's easier to try building an idealized bridge. You think Romans knew shit about wind simulation or material science? They didn't even formulate basic dynamics.
>which is that financial success is determined by one's I.Q. and work ethics, which you claimed was foolish.
Not me. Success anyway is somewhat affected by IQ and the like but never determined.

But go ahead suck Langan's dick and use his super high IQ science.

Do you want to cross a Roman bridge or a modern one? Bridges and generally technology has advanced as we have a better understanding of the laws of nature.

My general point is that we have to acknowledge basic truth in order to advance and understand the world. Acknowledging psychological differences between men and women and the difference in IQ distribution explains why men and women are not doing equally in the workforce. Disregarding these truths leads to man-hating. The high average I.Q. of Ashkenazi Jews explains why they are so successful. Denying this fact leads to anti-Semitism.

>some roman bridges are still functional after millenia
>we have modern bridges that require constant maintenance to not collapse

You are jerry-picking. Anyway, if you disagree with my view on Egalitarianism I recommend you address the remarks in the second paragraph of my previous post.

Natural laws do not exist, redditor.

My problem is that most people who bring up IQ differences the most ALSO want to have policies made to purposely disadvantage those lower and reward those higher essentially creating an IQ-based caste system. People say "you should acknowledge it!" ok but what does that matter unless you want to do something about it?

People aren't equal. Equal opportunities won't happen, because different people have different strengths and desires.
Equal rights, sure. Everyone -should- be equal under the law. But no trying to force it so that a down syndrome afflicted person and a genius have the same academic opportunities, or that a hideously deformed quasimodo like OP get to suck the same dick as renowned handsome homos like that movie star dude whose name I forgot.

We are endowed certain inalienable rights by our Creator and shouting Reddit/libcuck or crowding for the rope won't change that.

It's natural that people with different capabilities will achieve different things. There is no need to enforce anything.
Unlike "equality", which is just a manifestation of envy.

That isn't what equal opportunity means user, it just means that nobody is automatically turned away without even assessing if they'd be be fit for the job.

The why even bring up IQ differences unless you actively want a society to look down on people based on IQ? Because that is what you have happen when everyone acknowledges it.

That's the common sense approach. What politicians mean when they say this is what I am referring to.
A few years back I saw a guy's grade was more than 2 standard deviations lower than average and yet he got a free ride at a top university in my country, due to "equal opportunity" policies.

Are you playing dumb? Acknowledging some people just aren't good at some tasks isn't advocating for a caste system.

Why do people ITT and in Veeky Forums in general think equality means sameness?Words have meaning.
In nature noone is the same.We all know this and some pople are better in different things than others.
Equality is a man made concept that we make a moral choice to adhere to so that we create fair societies.

Because just like racism suddenly changed meanings, so did equality.
The semantic issue was addressed at the start of the thread, but the dismissive replies seem to indicate some do not recognize that as an actual devopment that is present in our society.

>sameness
bar bar speak for equality

it leads to it pretty obviously. Once something is used a criteria to differentiate people and it make visible people (since you need to make it visible to differentiate) people WILL be divided up into groups based on it. What if every person had to wear a tag that listed your salary or income before taxes or some country, what if genetic health history was info you basically have to give out?

>Why do people ITT and in Veeky Forums in general think equality means sameness?Words have meaning.

Veeky Forums rapes words into complete messes.

...

ugh
go to bed Locke

>That's like setting yourself up to be a comic book villain.
(((Who))) do you think wrote those comic books?

>everyone is so stupid
>everyone except me

...

People don't actually want equality. Sure they talk big about it, but they don't actually want it.

But it's what will happen. People are naturally disciminatory, and you're basically giving them an excuse to discriminate. Though put it better than me.

Why shouldn't I discriminate who I hire or rent to? It's a big risk, and I logically want to play the odds. It's morally wrong to force me to not discriminate if I so choose.

Because it only exists in ideology, People aren't equal to themselves on different days.

virgin internet reactionaries that post anime pictures

Evola is a beta cuck and died a virgin.

Because I think that more capable and intelligent people should be the sole holders of political power while the rest should have no or limited political rights. The best alone should lead.

>tfw too intelligent to not be neoliberal radical centrist

>evola
>virgin.

I'm sure for some period of time in your life, you really WERE the smartest fuck in the room, bud, but let me tell you: there's always someone legit smarter and someone who can pay to get legit smart people to SAY he's smarter.
For all your stupid infographics and reliance on statistics that suit your narrative-- lgbt are only 4% of the US population, and they tend to be on the high end of the IQ landscape. Are you aware you are advocating for them to rule over you with you having no say?
Who even decides who qualifies to be in the Master Class that rules all the unwashed masses?
Are you seriously dumb enough to blindly trust nobility to apply a high status to you?

>radical
When you care about the state, so "centrism" in meaning "I'm just not interested!" is incompatible here
>centrism
Mix of leftism and rightism.

Therefore:
>radical centrism = Fascism, National-Socialism, as these ideologies are RADICAL, and are a mix of left and right.

EVOLA BTFO!

>Why would *anyone* be against egalitarianism?

Because people are demonstrably not equal. To attempt to enforce equality is to oppose nature.

Giving more money to a heroin addict, even putting them in the top 1% of wealth, isn't going to make them any better off.

>Just a few decades ago people proposed mass-sterilization of the more "negroid" Irish because it was believed their poverty was due to their genetic inferiority and they'd never be able to perform like other Western countries without culling millions from their genepool.

People aren't equal.

Less Striner and more Hume

Yes IQ is the main factor in determining which race is better than the other. This is why Jews and East Asians (who have a significantly higher average IQ than Europeans) operate in the higher echelons of multiethnic societies. Euroniggers should stop whining and do what their masters tell them to do.

Because all egalitarianism is is supremacy phrased in a nicer way. Honestly no one seems to know what the word equal means anymore.

Episcopalian Scottish are actually smarter. That is the true master race.