Student Paper F992-2

Fall 1999, Section I
Reviewer Comments

 

European Equality and Conflict

 

 

Modem European history is readily recognized by conflict. Whether social, political, or military in nature, conflict is a characteristic common to European history. Accepting modem European history as characterized by conflict, it then benefits students of history to examine possible causes and reasons producing this conflict. Such an examination is the purpose of this paper. The paper will advance from the proposal that the conflicting nature of modern European history results in part from the European perspective on equality of opportunity.

 

By the idea of equality of opportunity, it is meant that each individual has an established and equal opportunity for progress and fulfillment in their life. This opportunity may be realized in many forms; economic, social, prestige, power, and more. The idea is not how or where it is realized, but that equality of opportunity is present as a universal. To support the claim that the conflicting nature of modern European history results from the European perspective on equality of opportunity, it requires both the establishment that such a belief would result in conflict and then verification that this idea is present through the history of European society. It is toward these this end that this paper will be directed.

 

The presence of the belief in equality of opportunity is easily recognized within European society. To discover this belief in equality, one needs only skim political documents of the eighteenth century such as the Declaration of the Rights of Man, examine the women's rights movement of the nineteenth century, or recall the anger and horror expressed for the actions of the Nazis, based on disregard for Jewish equality. One would expect that such a sensible and worthy belief would have little to do with conflict. So how does a belief in equality promote conflict within a society? To answer this one needs to further examine the nature of equality within modern European society.

 

Belief in equality in Europe will be described in on one of two natures; utopia equality and individualistic equality. Let us first consider utopia equality. Under this belief, it is held that an ideal or at least much improved (relative to current condition) society can be attained through proper recognition and practice of equality of opportunity. So now each individual or party within a society believes they have a right or at least possibility of realizing this utopia.¹ So then these parties propose and establish political policies or social agendas they believe necessary for arriving at this utopia. Naturally, other parties will produce different policies and agendas to reach their utopia and so a necessary conflict arises. Each side professes both a right to this utopia as well as a plan of attaining it. The second party now seems to represent a challenge and impediment to realizing this right allowed by equality of opportunity. Conflict then easily follows as a means of removing these challenges and impediments. To further this point one can look at a actual example from modern European history.

 

Defending the correctness of the Nazi's action (evacuation and extermination) toward the Jews would be a position seen as impossible and undesirable by most persons. Yet these acts occurred among a population which produced little opposition or outcry. How can this happen? Was justification given at the time? If indeed the idea of utopia equality was present in European society, then these questions can be answered for at least the beginning and initiation of the action against the Jews. The people of pre-World War II Germany were completely lacking of current prosperity or hope for progress. Then, Hitler and the Nazis arise proclaiming and producing progress and increased prosperity for the average German citizen. Through Nazi initiative, German citizens are again realizing to a greater extent their right of equality of opportunity and progress, when before they did not find such opportunity. From the position of utopia equality this is seen as an injustice having been remedied. So now the rise of the Nazi regime, bringing economic prosperity, is the realization of the ideal of equality of opportunity and so a cause to be supported. Then the question arises that if an injustice was beforehand present, who was to blame? The Nazi's unjustly, but convincingly place this blame on the Jews. Now the average German citizen blames Jews for the unrealized opportunity. Jews, so say the Nazis, prevented opportunity and prosperity in Germany. Within the utopia equality ideal, denial of opportunity and progress is the denying the basic provision of equality of opportunity. Carrying out of such an injustice would certainly deserve scorn and reprimand.

 

Modern Europeans, through their belief in equality of opportunity expect that progress and improvement will occur as opportunities are more truly realized. However, Europeans maintain this belief within the context of individuals and not society as a whole. For the average European citizen, the idea of individual equality results in the opportunity for individual progress and self-fulfillment. This mentality exist within Capitalistic theory such as that of Adam Smith. In Wealth of Nations Adams states,

 

"Man has almost constant occasion for the help of his brethren, and it is in vain for him to expect it from their benevolence only. He will be more likely to prevail if he can interest their self-love in his favor, and show them that it is for their own advantage to do for him what requires of them (Book I, Chap 2.)."

 

This passage certainly contains a direction toward progress of position (increased prosperity). It is progress in an individualistic manner however. Each man is pursuing his own prosperity or acting as Adam later says, "from their regard to their own interest." This is the right of each person within the context of individualistic equality, to freely pursue one's own interest and progress.

 

It can easily be seen how such a mentality can lead to conflict. If everyone has equal rights to success, wealth, property, etc., then at some point do these rights and individual pursuits lead to necessary conflict? It might be said that equality breeds conflict (Hobbes, Leviathan). Those positioned below you do not threaten or compete for your desired resources (wealth, prestige, power). Those above you are rarely considered within your realm and so do not concern you. It is those members of society equal with you that prove your rivals; providing competition for wealth, prestige, influence, and more. The idea of equality breeding conflict is seen in modem European society. Consider the social and gender conflict present through modern European history. Higher classes, those with more rights and privilege are often in conflict with those of restricted rights and privilege, whether based on economic or gender considerations. The conflict arises from the privileged class desiring to keep the lower or underprivileged class in their position. Why? Because in doing so the privileged prevent these others from adding to the competition for the desired resources. As the lower classes rise (on a social or gender scale), then more "equals" exist and so the potential share of the valued resources is spread and reduced. So through the perspective of individualistic equality, class and gender conflict is necessary and justified as means of maintaining the opportunity for realizing the full potential of personal progress and fulfillment.

 

Karl Marx described such a conflict between the proletariat and the bourgeois (Communist Manifesto). The bourgeois had realized their individual rights to progress and prosperity to the point of denying an equal opportunity to the working class. This may at first seem to reveal a disregard, not belief in the idea of equality. One however, must remember such actions by the bourgeois as based on the idea of individualistic equality. Each individual associates this equality as giving them the right to fully realize their opportunities, at some point individuals come to a point, actual or perceived, where each others' realization of opportunity come in conflict. The conflict in this case being the bourgeois' oppression of the proletariat.

 

The European belief of equality of opportunity lead to a belief that each person possesses a right to fully realize the potential for progress and prosperity in their life. This mentality sets the stage for conflict. When a party perceives that their right for progress is challenged or reduced by some other party, then conflict is necessary and justifiable. Additionally, Europeans' belief in equality of opportunity exists within an individual context. Individual equality associates the idea of equality of opportunity with the right of possessing all one is capable of attaining. This results in motivation of some specific group (nation, people group, political orientation) to pursue their own right to progress and prosperity to the degree of conflict and oppression of others. It was not the idea of equality of opportunity alone that encouraged conflict in modern European society, but the nature, held by Europeans, of this idea and the mentalities of competition and conflict that followed from it.

 

¹By the word "utopia" it is not meant that any parties truly believed a perfect society could be attained, but that a society as ideal as could be expected, from their perspective, can be realized.