Yes, and egalitarianism does NOT suggest all are equal rather that all should have equal rights. A just system. Further, because we are not all equal in fact, a healthy society would operate as an objective meritocracy voluntarily trading values which removes: -gender -race -religion -heritage -age -physiology -nationality from the conversation, reducing it to “What can and are you willing to produce that is a value to yourself and others?” If by no fault of your own you are not capable or are not valued by those near you, charity was available to some degree (if it hadn’t been supplanted by government) but is not a right, nor should it be unconditional.

Replies (2)

Further yet, an objective meritocracy voluntarily trading values which removes: -gender -race -religion -heritage -age -physiology -nationality from consideration, does NOT require homogenizing of the above rather encourages normalization of natural rather than forced (ineffective) diversity and the option of like wanting to exist with like or the desire to exist separately from unlike. (Disclosure: I am a retired, white, Western European heritage, heterosexual, slightly above middle-class affluence, male—in other words, THE problem. 😎