Re-examining The Doctrine of Equality

March 3, 2010.

Re-examining the Doctrine of Equality.
By T.S.Khanna

Scientific and physical knowledge of our planet and the Universe is definite knowledge. All else, that surpasses such knowledge, is dogmatic (dictatorial, not subject to examination) knowledge expressed by theological philosophy of religious leaders. At times, political leaders have also invoked the authority of God or Creator to sell certain improvable but opportune concepts that defy human logic and observations.

On July 4, 1776, the Declaration of Independence captured the zeitgeist of the time and its impact is still alive. The doctrine of equality is rooted in a few words of the Declaration: “….that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights, ….”.

The original intent of the Declaration was to provide equal opportunity for all, free of prejudice or oppression. The doctrine of equality, however, stretched the intent and laid everyone on Procrustean bed, regardless of one’s intelligence, education, interests, or maturity. It is showing significant negative effects on democratic systems:

1. “One man, one vote,” a corollary of the doctrine of equality, neutralizes the effectiveness of the society’s intelligentsia on the political system. The number of ignorant voters is always far greater than those who understand the government structure, its operations, political issues and their resolution. Many nescient voters do not have the ability or the interest to identify their own good. Special interest groups often manipulate them by social engineering. Imagine Aristotle’s vote being offset by an ignorant voter with equal voting right. “One man, one vote,” does not permit the best candidates to get elected, it drives good people away from political participation.
2. The doctrine of equality has its unintended effect; with the feeling of equality, some people sense injustice seeing some others wealthier than themselves. Those in higher income groups sense injustice in being equated with the lower income group. They resent their earnings transferred through taxation and entitlement programs to those who resent the very people whose earnings are transferred to them. In all socio-economic groups, a sense of injustice is triggered by this doctrine.
3. A society is best served by a political system supportive of its social values. Most societies are hierarchical with well defined deference structure as a source of status gradation, social integration, and stability. In the absence of a deference structure, money and popularity assume greater role as sources of status. Monetary symbols status keeps people in a constant overdrive to associate with the wealthier and dissociate with the less wealthy. Status through popularity involves older people to pretend younger and avow the popular youth culture-----the lowest common multiple (LCM) of diverse cultures. This culture continues to degenerate as more status seekers support it.
4. The doctrine of equality pits women against men and children against parents without redefining the traditional roles based on obligations, not on equality. This also obstructs the process of transferring of good classic values of human culture from parents to children.
5. The doctrine of equality also implies equalization of wealth. The psychology of equality among the lower socio-economic groups, with larger number of voters, has a sure force to push democracy to socialism, with minimal wealth producing incentives.

In light of the above-mentioned observations, I recommend that in all democratic systems:
1. The doctrine of equality may be replaced by the originally intended doctrine of equality of opportunity;
2. To make voter better judges of the competing political candidates and issues, necessary requisites may be imposed for voters’ eligibility, under equality of opportunity; and,
3. The practice of equal voting right for all citizens may be replaced by differential voting credits for voters, in accordance with their contribution to the society, under equality of opportunity.

Democracy and Religious Harmony

By T.S. Khanna, March 13,2008.



Globalizing of the planet with diverse belief systems now requires a new paradigm to resolve the conflicts of religious identity and particularism in the pluralism of belief systems. Traditional ways of self-presenting or perceiving others is inadequate and becoming outright dangerous in view of the enhanced potential of the modern technology..

To attain religious harmony in a democracy, a well organized, publicly funded, and sustained effort is now called for. Adoption of a progressive solution to control and gradually root out religious conflicts is an imperative in democratic societies. Pursuit of religious harmony would require modification in some traditional religious beliefs as well as in some democratic values.

Based on my observations and experience, some suggestions to trigger critical thinking in pursuit of religious harmony in democratic societies are offered:

• Sermons;

It is a common practice in every religious institution to weave in smoothly the exclusivity and superiority of its religion’s theology. Quite often, obliquely, and, at times, expressly, it is sermonized that other religions are inferior, ignorant, or even satanic forces. For the faithful in attendance, the sermon induces an intoxicating feeling to experience an illusion of real connection with God through the only truth available and to them only. The experience also fortifies the conviction of the false or satanic path of others. Such sermons, repeatedly delivered, sow the seed of hostility in the young minds and in the adults strengthen the feelings of superiority and exclusivity over other religions. Subconsciously, their sense of righteousness urges them eventually to correct others as a sacred cause.
Sermons may be modified and monitored to remove the sting against other religions.

• Proselytization;

The missionary impulse of proselytization (conversion of others into one’s own religion) is encouraged by most religious institutions. Conversion techniques include (a) personal contact by missionaries, (b) economic incentives, and, (c) force.
The success of conversion missions generates hostilities among the followers whose number is reduced.
To improve inter-religious relations, advocacy techniques may be replaced by the technique of “charm envoy” or “soft power”, i.e., lead by setting a precedent of exemplary lifestyle for others to follow voluntarily by admiration.

• Religious Myths and Miracles;

Some religious leaders and their in-groups fabricate fictitious events to support surreal myths as evidence of their prophets’ or their own power of miracle. The false images projected as reality to the gullible faithful holds them in awe and locks their minds into a blind faith. The faithful are then exploited emotionally, financially, and, at times, physically. They are programmed into giving up everything and even die for the cause defined by the religious leaders in the name of God. Fabricated myths and miracles are used to prove the leaders’ direct connection with the anthropocentric image of God..
All religious leaders may be instructed to encourage self-thinking among the followers. “False truths” or “surreal truths” in currency may be identified and excluded from religious teachings. False assurances and hopes generated by pretentious teachings to exploit the faithful may also be forbidden.




• Tax Deductible Religious Donations;

Tax deductible donations are quite often misused, not conforming to the intent of the law. Government ends up subsidizing some religious activities that divide people and promote religious groups politically.
The use of tax-deductible donations may be strictly restricted and monitored to (a) search for rational verification of the traditionally held truths, and, (b) promote harmony with other religions.


• Religious Majority v/s Minority;

People of religious majority make disparaging remarks and degrading jokes about minority religions. They pick on minorities to feed the human weakness to feel superior to others without having to prove so. At the cost of damaging the inter-religious goodwill, they gratify their sadistic desire under the umbrella of majority power without any fear of reprisal.
The blasting foul tongues eventually become the architect of the template for type casting a degrading image of religious minorities. Over a period, such practice alienates the minorities, especially their children with long lasting effects. In mindset of the majority, typecasting or stereotyping of the minorities starts becoming a justification to consider minorities as a negative force in the society. Political leaders exploit the ready made opportunity with disastrous results. Note the treatment of Jews in Germany during the WWII.
Disparaging remarks, degrading jokes, or typecasting of religious minorities may be forbidden and enforced by law.

• Inter-religious and intra-religious Ignorance;

Majority of people of different faiths are not fully familiar with the esoterica of their own faith and quite ignorant of other faiths. This is one of the significant factors in causing alienation and religious conflicts.
To open up the young minds, high school education curriculum may include mandatory courses introducing all mainstream religions of the society, including their origin, philosophy, theology, customs, sanctities, and traditions. Internship at the institutions of the mainstream religions may also be required to gain first hand knowledge.

• Religious Identity;

In a society with stereotyped religious communities, when a person’s religion is identified by his/her name, appearance, signs, symbols, dress, or lingo, ready made hostilities kick in and influence his/her merit as an individual. At times, with a backlog of cumulative hostilities, the meetings take place at near flashpoint. People do not communicate, understand, or appreciate each other’s merit or potential because of the visible religious differences.
To minimize the inter-play of ready made hostilities, measures may be adopted to discourage the disclosure of religious identity by appearance or lingo. Encourage downplaying of religion in public and making it more of a private and personal matter.

• Religious Morality;

Varying standards of morality are a bone of contention for the faithful. On top of that, democratic constitution imposes a spiritual-value-neutral morality based on equality and freedom. The law courts establish the morality norms. The conflict is not only between the religions but also between the constitution and the religions on this issue.
Traditional religious morality norms are male-gender-favored, unacceptable to the liberated female gender.
Identify, define, and incorporate appropriate morality norms in the Constitution of democratic government.

• Secular Institute of Religions (SIR);

Religions have inspired the best of human behavior as well as the worst. Some inspired people do a tremendous good to the humanity while the inspirations for some others are a cause of immeasurable harm to the humanity.
For a scholarly, rational, and nuanced understanding of human religiosity and the changing needs of humanity due to globalization, a systematic study of religions to identify and resolve the roots of religious conflicts is essential.
Establish publicly funded Secular Institute of Religions. Functions of the Institute may include but may not be limited to
1. Bring out, analyze, and openly discuss esoterica of the mainstream religions of the society,
2. Identify the roots of religious conflicts and explore alternative resolutions,
3. Evaluate periodically the political flashpoints of the various religious groups in the society to recommend means of averting the potential conflicts,
4. Test rationally (with accepted standards of reliability and validity) the perceived truths of religions and identify the non-testable truths (felt truths, not final truths) causing religious conflicts,
5. To serve the common goal of religions and science in finding the irrefutable, verifiable facts or truths, establish a link between religion and science.
6. Identify the common values of the mainstream religions and educate the citizens with emphasis on common values,
7. Develop principles of a secular religion, supported by the mainstream religious values, and,
8. Establish places of worship for the secular religion to encourage its adoption by the citizens without having to abandon the religion of their choice.

Systemic Flaws in Democracy

By T.S.Khanna, February 6,2010.



Historically, political ideas about democracy gained currency in the periods of crisis. In most cases, crisis promoted the mental intensity of the public to a high pitch. Political leaders seized the opportunity. They invoked the authority of God to justify and sanctify their political ideologies. Capturing the zeitgeist of the time, they created democratic constitutions. All those who fought for the cause of freedom must be honored as the ornaments of humanity.

Usually, measures adopted during emergency are just sufficient to meet the need of the hour. They are strengthened or completed after the crisis is over. However, the democratic ideas outlasting the crisis have not been critically examined to shore up their strength and evaluate their side effects or adverse effects, mostly because of the associated sanctity and resistance of the vested interests..

Practically, all democratic systems have been established under similar conditions with the main emphasis on individual rights and freedom. Contrary to the common belief, democracy, in spite of its claims and dreams, is not a panacea to all social ills. The emphasis on individual rights and freedom, without commensurate responsibility and accountability, creates its own set of social ills, not always resolvable through democratic means. Just as “ …power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely..”, freedom defies justice and absolute freedom defies justice absolutely. Freedom without conscience destroys everything.

Individual rights and freedom cannot be an end in themselves. While they create a condition for social justice, they also tend to atomize the society. They do not move the nation toward a common purpose or national unity. This weakness is inherent in all democratic systems.

The field of human intellect is full of opposing logic. All aspects of democracy do not have the support of irrefutable logic. Some of the ideas with limited shelf life, some with limited applicability, have not been critically examined. Democratic constitutions carry no provisions to make distinctions or for flexibility to counter varying situations.

The case in point is that of the foreign terrorists of 9/11 and the explosive underwear terrorist caught red handed in the airplane on December 25, 2009, near Detroit, Michigan. There can be no simpler illustration of mental midget-dwarfs to which ideological rigidity has reduced our constitutionalists in power positions. They have insisted on giving Miranda rights and civil court trials to the proven foreign enemies of the nation. At the peril of the national security, they justify their position by the letter of the law, ignoring the intent and the spirit of the law.

Under changed conditions, democratic systems have experienced noticeable weaknesses but ignore them. The leadership usually considers them as imponderable and axiomatic by force of settled habits.

In this state of complacency and false sense of security, democratic systems tend to lose grip on the real time situation and on vision of the future. They are becoming vulnerable by ignoring their flaws. Continued neglect of the flaws can create a crisis of their own making. Strength of a chain lies in its weakest link. Democratic systems can lose it all if they do not identify and rectify their weak links. Not caring to see one’s flaws is the biggest flaw.

Further, democratic political culture does not lend itself to maintaining and strengthening national unity. Democratic approach to solving problems is shaped by brokerage process of partisan debates and disputes for give and take (mutual back scratching) compromises. The problems that do not fall within the purview of the prevailing political culture get ignored or tackled erratically, e.g., foreign policy, economic policy, trade and commerce.

Democratic systems do not include non-partisan instrumentation for setting and pursuing national goal or national unity. This condition nurtures economic and social conflicts.

Here, only a few scratched surface flaws are indicated at a glance to trigger the reader’s interest.

Quite often, our euphoria and zeal for democracy throw us off accuracy of judgment for the measures necessary to protect it. Politics may be based on human reasoning but must be adjusted to human nature.

In an effort to make democratic systems stronger with the benefit of new knowledge gained by experience under the changed conditions, we need to sharpen and clarify certain vulnerable themes based on democratic ideology.

It is about time to set aside sacred cows and use contingency approach for security of the people and protection of democracy.