Day 230: The Principle of Need and the Principle of Equality are One

  
For context, also read:
Day 228: False Dilemma: Abuse or be Abused – Social Justice and Human Rights - Part 6
Day 226: Deserving Life or Death - Social Justice and Human Rights - Part 5
Day 224: Justice and Human Rights - Part 4 - Social Justice: Merits and Deserts
Day 222: Justice and Human Rights - Part 3 - Substantive Justice
Day 220: Justice and Human Rights - Part 2
Day 218: Justice and Human Rights

The question of who should get what has been answered by (most prominently) communists and socialists as: In accordance to people’s needs.

What is a Need?

When one researches this topic, it is fascinating to see how much fuss is being made on the concept and definition of ‘need’ – where it is claimed to be a vague and a ‘notoriously difficult to define’ concept. This is most fascinating, since ‘need’ is one of the most straightforward words that exists – and so, making it seem that it is not clear what need is, is merely trying to find fault so that one has an excuse to discard the principle altogether.

So, let’s humor everyone by showing what need is. When one lacks something that is causing harm to one’s well-being – then that something is a need. Herein – well-being is understood from a holistic perspective as including physical, social and psychological well-being. Why such a holistic perspective? Because all three dimensions of well-being influence each other. If one’s diet is inadequate, one will suffer on a physical level, but it will also affect one’s psychological well-being, since our psychological well-being is intertwined with the physical through chemical relationships. When we manifest psychologically imbalanced behavior, our roles and position in relation to others will be influenced, in turn affecting our social well-being.

Traditionally, the word ‘need’ has been approached to only consider the physical dimension – where well-being is not the goal, but survival is – where, as long as one has a basic minimum requirements to sustain oneself – such as clothing, shelter, food and water – one’s needs are met.

More recently the word ‘need’ has been expanded upon through making a distinction between ‘basic’ and ‘non-basic’ needs – where basic needs include the traditional meaning of the word as one’s most essential survival requirements and non-basic needs include things like education and healthcare.

Which definition of the word ‘need’ is valid and appropriate depends on our aspirations as living beings on this planet. Are we here to survive or are we here to live a life worth living? Considering the history of mankind and how much effort was put into researching and devising ways to enhance the quality of human life on Earth – it is safe to say that we as a race do not merely aspire to surviving and making it to the next day – we would all like to enjoy ourselves, fulfill ourselves, and make something of ourselves and our lives. Therefore, to only consider need in relation to survival is inadequate and a holistic perspective of need is appropriate.

To say, then, that the principle of need cannot be a basis for the distribution of goods because the word ‘need’ is not definable, is unacceptable.

The Principle of Need and the Principle of Equality

As discussed in Day 224: Justice and Human Rights - Part 4 - Social Justice: Merits and Deserts, the principles of justice include
- The principle of merit and desert
- The principle of need
- The principle of equality

Each one of these are regarded as different principles. However – in clearly defining what a ‘need’ is – we see that the principle of need and the principle of equality are one and the same. Because – if everyone is provided with all they require to live a life of well-being – then it stands equal to distributing goods in a way to provide each one with an equal quality of life – a life where each one’s well being is effectively looked after.

However, this is not how the principle of need and principle of equality are interpreted in academic thought. Distribution according to the principle of need has been interpreted in two ways.

In communist thought, the principle of ‘from each according to his ability to each according to his needs’ is put forward. Herein, what a ‘need’ is can be defined on an individual level – where each one ‘decides’ what one’s needs are.

According to the socialist tradition, some form of authority should define what ‘need’ is at a particular time. Their idea is that – once everyone’s needs are met – further distribution can occur on the principle of merit and desert. This view is in line with the popular ‘Basic Income Grant’ proposals

Both views are problematic.

I decide what my need is

When we rely on each one to decide what their needs are – we open the door for abuse. The temptation becomes too big to define a need beyond a need, entering the arena of pure desires and wants.

We have defined need in terms of anything one requires to live a life of physical, psychological and social well-being. Those are obviously things everyone would want. We can in fact ask the question: “What more could one want?” And it is exactly within this – the ‘more’ – that we are dealing with desires and wants. Desires and wants are things that – if given to one being, would deprive another being of one of their needs, and thus, cause harm. Desires can also typically not be given to all equally. Being famous is a desire, being better off than one’s neighbor is a desire, having power over another is a desire.

Within this scenario we cannot ensure social justice – because if we allow individuals to manipulate the system through including desires and wants in their ‘needs basket’, then harm would take place in respect of others’ psychological, social and physical well-being, and thus – defying the goal of ensuring each one with their needs.

The Basic Income Grant proposal

The basic income proposal is a nice attempt towards eliminating the dangers of the principle of merit and desert as discussed in the previous blog-posts – and so, we can say ‘a step in the right direction’. However – in the long run it is not sustainable. The combination of applying the principle of need and the principle of merit/desert, manifests inequality, where, for some, one’s needs is what one will be provided with, while others will be able to indulge in desires as well. We end up in the same position as when each one decides what their needs are – where the need of some will inevitably be sacrificed, in order to satisfy others with the desires they apparently ‘deserve’.

We continue this discussion in the next blog of this series.

Related articles

• Day 224: Justice and Human Rights - Part 4 - Social Justice: Merits and Deserts
• Day 226: Deserving Life or Death - Social Justice and Human Rights - Part 5
• Day 315: How many Human Rights Can You Afford?
• 367. Children's Human Rights | Equal Money
• 364.Education is a Human Right |Equal Money
• 366. Health Care is a Human Right | Equal Money
• Day 229: Can Equality only be Achieved through Inequality? | Equality and Human Rights - Part 7
• 359. Equal Life Rights
• The Equal Life Foundation - Bill of Rights
• 365. Labor is a Human Right |Equal Money

Read More

Day 87: Competition and Efficiency

This is a continuation to Day 81: The Role of Government in the Economy

I forgive myself that I have accepted and allowed myself to believe that ‘competition’ is the key to a well-functioning economy

I forgive myself that I have accepted and allowed myself to believe that ‘competition’ is the key innovation and creativity

I forgive myself that I haven’t accepted and allowed myself to see and realise that within the design of competition there are always losers and winners – where from a group, only ‘one’ can make it and be successful where the remaining others of the group perish and lose everything within the competition race

I forgive myself that I have accepted and allowed myself to believe that competition is ‘efficient’ – where competition will allow only ‘the best’ to make it, and those are ‘not good enough’ to lose – and so ‘naturally’ allow ‘the best’ to prevail – without seeing and realising that currently within this world competition is an unfair game, as ‘who is the best’ is defined and dependent on how many resources one has available – where those with the most funds will win the game as they will be more able to support themselves in developing well-functioning goods/services – and so it is not a matter of ‘weeding out the competition’ as ‘those who aren’t good enough’ – but merely a selective process of ‘survival of the fittest’ as ‘survival of those with the most money’ – and so, the whole race/game wasn’t really a competition from the beginning, as the outcome was already pre-determined where he who has the most resource will be the Winner – and as such I forgive myself that I haven’t accepted and allowed myself to see and realise that competition within the economy and business environment is actually inefficient – as there can only be one winner (or at least very few), and where the rest spend their time and money investing in the *hope* that they might also win, while it is already pre-determined who will win and lose – and as such, there is not point to get everyone involved in a ‘race for the best’ – as we already know who’s going to win and dominate the market, as the one with the most money – and so there’s no point for all those other people to waste their time and money as they are not going to make it anyway, and as such competition is really just a waste of time and money for many – where we try to create the illusion that ‘everyone has an equal opportunity’ but where ‘only the best will make it’ – while there is no such thing currently as ‘equal opportunity’ as opportunity is linked to money and money is currently not equal

I forgive myself that I haven’t accepted and allowed myself to see and realise that since the one with the most money will be most effective at creating / producing / innovating – we might as well assign the task of production to a singular firm and provide this firm with the resources/funds to make the best out of it – where people within a firm produce and create goods/services for the sake of perfection, creating the best product possible – and not for the sake of competition of ‘wanting to be the best’ from the starting point of ‘dominating the market’ and reaping massive profits – while others lose everything within the competition game where ‘Winner takes All’

I forgive myself that I have accepted and allowed myself to believe that efficiency and productivity can only take place within a ‘competitive environment’ – and within that I forgive myself that I haven’t accepted and allowed myself to see and realise that an environment of cooperation can be way more efficient – where our own human physical bodies are proof of this, as our human physical bodies are the most energy efficient machines in existence and are incomparable to any manmade machine – where our human physical body does not depend on competition, but one close cooperation where each part, each organ, each cell does its part and does this to the best of their ability – and where all cells receive equal amount of resources, if competition and the unequal distribution of resources would take place – our whole body will soon collapse as each part is dependent on each other’s cooperation – which is exactly what is happening to Earth as a Body – where we are not supplying equal amount of resources to all the parts of the body causing poverty, starvation, pollution – where even though the rich may momentarily be “well-off” – once the balance has gone out too far – they too will perish with the rest of us, as there will be no-one left to slave away their lives and supply them with the resources they want/need

I forgive myself that I have accepted and allowed myself to believe that government and economy should be separated – without seeing and realising that in a world where the government is supposed to represent and serve the people – and where money is the main point controlling people’s lives – that you cannot do one without the other – and so the economy and government within serving to the people from the starting point of What is Best for All should not be separated but be One and cooperate / act as a single entity within ensuring that everyone’s needs are taken care of and where nobody has to be a loser for the illusion of competition as apparent “efficiency"

Read More

Day 50: Resource Distribution - Part 2

I forgive myself that I have accepted and allowed myself to have created an economic system which relies on the principle on ‘Supply and Demand’ to distribute resources to beings – where I / we’ve accepted and allowed ‘demand’ to only count if and when a person has money to back up there want/need – and within that I forgive myself that I haven’t accepted and allowed myself to make a distinction between wants and needs – where it doesn’t matter what one wants/needs as long as they have the money to back up what they want/need, I don’t care about what it is they want/need

I forgive myself that I have accepted and allowed myself to have created and agreed upon an economic system which favours beings with money over beings with no money – where we / I have accepted and allowed ourselves to place value within money over Life and within that create disastrous consequence as that which has Real Value as Life, as the Physical is now completely disregarded in the name of Money

I forgive myself that I haven’t accepted and allowed myself to see and realise that since no-one has ever been equal in terms of money – a system such as the one we have now which works within the principle of supply and demand and where demand is only validated through having the financial means to back up you want/need, with not everyone having money/having access to equal money – can and will only result in the deepening of inequality and this misery within this world

I forgive myself that I haven’t accepted and allowed myself to actually read that which is being taught within economics textbooks – where I will simply read the theory of supply and demand and go “okay so that’s how it works” without ever questioning or looking at what is being implied within the theories – and within that accept and allow the current condition of the world as inequality resulting in suffering for the majority to continue to exist

I forgive myself that I have accepted and allowed myself to have created a division between those who supply and those who consume – where each are standing at opposite self-interest sides – instead of seeing and realising that everyone is part of this world and thus should form part of both creating as giving and ‘consuming’ as receiving – and so both groups self-interest ought to be aligned to what is Best for All as each play their part within the Body of Existence

I forgive myself that I have accepted and allowed myself to have created an economic system where wants are valued over needs within having defined the starting point of economy as using resources to satisfy human wants – and within that I forgive myself that I have accepted and allowed myself to have created an economic system where not everyone wants and needs can be satisfied because of the reality that we cannot satisfy unlimited wants through limited means – and so I forgive myself that I have accepted and allowed myself to have created a system of supply and demand in an attempt to ‘scale down’ the amount of people who ‘demand’ a particular good/service – and within that make it appear as if the market is ‘satisfied’ – as through the equilibrium principle the amount supplied will equal the amount demand which sounds so nice – where an illusion of ‘equality’ is created without seeing/realising that this is not real equality as a whole bunch of beings had to be taken out of the equation for the system to work – and those are the beings who end up living in slums/townships fending for their lives

I forgive myself that I have accepted and allowed myself to place the responsibility of what needs to be produced and to whom it must go within a system of supply and demand – where producers will solely consider what is demanded and supply accordingly without ever stopping for a moment and asking themselves whether this is really best for all

Read More