What If Humans Were Never Created Equal?
Humanity is naturally gifted a chance to enjoy equal rights and privileges in an environment that accommodates everyone. The evolution, biblical and other accounts of the creation of man, did not suggest that some persons were created to be higher than others. This is why people believe that we are naturally created equal and should remain so.
But considering the argument of being naturally gifted with equal opportunities and possibly talents, one is tempted to draw a sharp distinction between equality and uniqueness. Do we describe the situation as truly having the ability to enjoy equality in the human society or a situation of accommodating the uniqueness of every individual.
But then again, how do we properly define uniqueness? What truly makes an individual unique and how can we best describe a situation of accommodating the uniqueness of individuals? Is it an idealistic concept or a concept that has a practical angle?
Some school of thought believe in the natural equal structure of the universe and also affirm that the desire of man to search for completeness is a motivation for domination which has perpetuated inequality.
What if equality is just a fixion?
Thomas Hobbes and other proponents of the social contract theory of the origin of state evolution opine that individuals in their quest to establish a central authority that will manage the affairs of everyone preferred the option of entrusting their common resources and parts of their individual rights and liberties into the hands of a few who will administer on behalf of everyone.
These few individuals control the instrument of state power and determine rules for the common good of all in the spirit of the social contract.
Edward Hagee and other fellow philosophers also assert that individuals surrender parts of their rights to a central authority who will make laws for the common good of all. The benefit is that the central authority will ensure that no individual member of the state is excluded, and everyone is afforded the chance to enjoy the good fruits of the land.
But what could have motivated individuals to willingly surrender a significant portion of their personal rights and liberties to a group of few individuals in exchange for protection and what many will describe as equal treatment?
If there was ever a social contract, are we safe to say that the fear of domination could have served as a major factor.
It is not debatable that man was born free and should ordinarily enjoy his personal rights and liberties to the fullest. However, the universe has been designed to constantly expose the imperfection of man. This is why it becomes impossible for anyone to meet his needs without relating with another. Of course, this sense of incompleteness and the understanding that man needs other individuals to achieve completeness often drives the motivation of man to dominate as he searches for perfection.
What If Social Contract Was Just an idea?
In as much as the need to ensure balance in our society may have influenced the decision of individuals to live together whether under the concept of social contract or not. There is an urgent need to examine some of the conditions that were given before the surrender and the various undertakings that were made by the state as its responsibilities to the individuals.
But what about the stories of conquest as historical facts have shown. Was there an agreement between the conqueror and the conquered? What about kingdoms? Do we agree that there is also an arrangement between the ruler and the ruled?
This is why it was established in the paragraph above that despite the assumption that the social contract theory was not just an academic proposition, its real application was subject to rational questioning.
Looking back at the social contract theory, what was the imputes of members of the marginalised groups such as women and people with disabilities? But beyond the question of their inputs in the imaginary negotiations, do we conclusively say that people with disabilities also enjoy the natural gift of equality as was highlighted above?
What if people with disabilities were never equal members of the society?
From the analogy above, one major inference can be sharply drawn; the voices of people with disabilities were never considered at any point during the imaginary negotiations. The presence of an impairment has taken away the sense of natural equality from people with disabilities as one who no longer enjoy equal number of natural gifts with other members of the society could easily feel cheated by nature.
However, nature compensated them with other innate abilities that if harnessed, could make up for the absence of the physical natural gift.
But does the current social arrangement of our society provide any room for these people to enjoy this natural compensation?
Certainly not the case as reports all over the world speak the same language. Do we then conclude that man’s quest for completeness which has inspired in him, the spirit of domination has further widened the gap between the naturally more equal and the naturally less equal individuals?
State power which in this piece has been assumed as an instrument to provide relief to the weak, is now a tool of domination.
What if the world only values strengths even in the face of defeat?
One question that has been constantly put forward is; where are the voices of the people with disabilities who are the victims of man’s quest for domination and power? Are there voices loud enough? Does the solution to their challenges lie in charity or active participation through advocacy?
What if the social contract was actually negotiated without the input of people with disabilities?
Can it be renegotiated?
Between 2006 and today, many countries have taken significant steps to pass relevant legislations to protect the rights of people with disabilities. These efforts stem from the coming into force of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2008. According to a report published by the European Union in 2015, more than 60% of EU member states have domesticated the convention in their states. Efforts have also being intensified to further work out the modalities for the smooth implementation of these legislations in these countries to give people with disabilities the best experience.
In Africa, similar efforts are being intensified but with limited results. Despite the developing status of African nations, it is difficult to narrow the slow compliance to a particular factor.
But what if advocacy is not strong enough?
Well, advocacy is not just limited to engaging those we consider as stakeholders but also include creatively engaging them for a greater result. Several organizations of people with disabilities have sprung up in the last few years. But does Africa feel their impact? How many have been able to share the stories of these special people from the creeks of Bayelsa state in Nigeria to the desert land of Sahara, down to the war-ravaged parts of Sudan.
Capturing the unique perspectives of these special persons, the goal is to shed light to their struggle, challenges and conquest, offering unique perspectives on how to progressively chat a new course of inclusion for Africans with disabilities.
What if there is a way forward?
Yes, a way forward is here with the establishment of the Isaac Joshua Initiative for Disabilities; an internationally inclined and purpose driven non-governmental organization with the mandate to improve the welfare of Africans with disabilities through creative and somewhat unconventional but legitimate means.
Nature may have not provided people with disabilities with equal natural physical gifts as can be best described, but no society has ever been built on the assumption that we enjoy same number of natural gifts especially from the physical angle.
Ideally, societies function on the basis of mutual respect for the uniqueness of the various individuals that make up the society; recognizing that equality is never measured in quantity.
This is why organizations of people with disabilities in Africa should pay attention to the thought provoking questions in the first three paragraphs of this piece. We should be able to properly define individual uniqueness within the social context as its understanding will help shape the direction for further advocacy for the respect of the unique abilities of others. This enlightenment is the driving force of IJID.
Would you like to know more? Watch out for our next publication. We can renegotiate the social contract in our favour as man values strengths in the face of defeat, not total surrender.