“ We hold these truths to be self-evident,” the composers of the American Declaration of Independence wrote, “ that all men are created equal, that they are endowed bv their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these rights are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” (i.e. wealth). Yet, when the framers of the Declaration of Independence wrote that “ all men are created equal,” they meant quite literally “ men,” since women certainly did not enjoy these rights in the new republic. However, they did not mean literally “ all men" since black slavery continued after both the American and the French revolutions. Despite the universal and transcendental terms in which the manifestos of the revolutionary bourgeois were framed, the societies that were being built were much more restricted. What was required was equality of merchants, manufacturers, lawyers, and tax farmers with the formerly privileged nobility', not the equality of all persons. The freedom needed was the freedom to invest, to buy and sell both goods and labor, to set up shop in any place and at any time without the hindrance of feudal restrictions on commerce and labor, and to possess women as reproductive labor. What was not needed was the freedom of all
human beings to pursue happiness. As in Orwell’s Animal Farm, all
were equal, but some more equal than others.
The problem in creating an ideological justification is that the principle may prove rather more sweeping than the practice demands. The founders of liberal democracy needed an ideology to justify and legitimate the victory of the bourgeoisie over the entrenched aristocracy, of one class over another, rather than an ideology that would eliminate classes and patriarchy. Yet they also needed the support of the menu peuple, the yeoman farmers, and the peasants, in their struggle. One can hardly imagine making a revolution with the battle cry “ Liberty and justice for some!” So the ideology outstrips the reality. The pamphleteers of the bourgeois revolution created, by necessity and no doubt in part by conviction, a set of philosophical principles in contradiction with the social reality they intended to build.
The final victory of the bourgeoisie over the old order meant that
the ideas of freedom and equality that had been the subversive weapons of a revolutionary class now became the legitimating ideology of the class in power. The problem was and still is that the society created
by the Revolution was in obvious contrast with the ideology from
which it drew its claims of right. Slavery continued in French St.
Dominique until the successful slave revolt of 1801 and in Martinique
for a further lift}' years. It was abolished only in 1833 in British dominions and not until 1863 in the United States. Suffrage, even among the free, was greatly restricted. After the Reform Bill of 1832 in Britain still only about 10 percent of the adult population was enfranchised, and not until 1918 was universal manhood suffrage established. Woman suffrage waited until 1920 in the United States. 1928 in Britain, 1946 in Belgium, and 1981 in Switzerland. The rights of women to own property and to enter any job they choose on a par with men was and still remains a battleground.
More fundamentally, economic and social power remain extremely
unequally distributed and show no sign of being effectively redistributed. Despite the idea of equality, some people have power over their own lives and the lives of others, while most do not. There remain rich people and poor people, employer? who own and control the means of production and employees who do not even control the
conditions of their own labor. By and large, men are more powerful
than women and whites more powerful than blacks. The income distribution in the United States and Britain is clearly unequal, with about 20 percent of the income accruing to the highest 5 percent of the families and only 5 percent accruing to the lowest-paid 20 percent. The distribution of wealth is much more skewed. The richest 5 percent own 50 percent of all the wealth in the United States, and if one discounts the houses people live in, the cars they drive, and the clothes they wear, then nearly all wealth belongs to the richest 5 percent
I know this is fairly standard Marxist social analysis with a bit more explicit focus on biological determinism, but damn the first few chapters of Not in Our Genes just hit for me