discrimination in favour of disadvantaged groups such as women and
ethnic minorities such as ‘untouchables’ in India.
‘Equal rights’ are normally interpreted as relating to some
minimumstandard – e.g. a house, a job, etc. – not that all have the
same standard of housing or equal pay.
Another related but separate issue is the extent to which social
policy can and should be directed toward reversing social inequalities
(LeGrand, 1982). The short answer would seem to be that most of
these rest much more upon the nature of the fiscal, economic and
legal systems than on social policies in a narrow sense. Distinctions
should also be drawn between social inequalities that are the result of
economic differences, and those that result from attempts to maintain
social distancebetween different status groups. For instance British
social class or Indian caste differences may not reflect the economic
circumstances of those concerned. A British national lottery winner
might still be refused admission to a golf club on the grounds of an
uncouth accent or unconventional appearance, whilst an Indian
untouchable (even if a well-paid professional) could still be rejected as
a dining companion by those of Brahmin caste.
BOX 3.3 CONCEPTS OF EQUALITY: SUMMARY
CONCEPTS 63Treating everyone the same.
Treating everyone appropriately.
Equality before the law – ‘Equal subjection of all classes to the ordinary
law of the land administered by the ordinary courts’ (Dicey, 1941:
202–203).
Political equality – equal political rights (e.g. voting, citizenship) to all.
Equality of opportunity – ‘success or failure [in careers] must be made
to depend only upon the capacity or character of the persons con-
cerned, not on the accidents of wealth’ (Benn and Peters, 1959: 128).
Social equality – reducing or eliminating the ‘social distance’ (attitudes
of superiority/inferiority) between social groups (e.g. classes or ethnic
groups) (see Benn and Peters, 1959: Ch. 5).