DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES

AHMADU BELLO UNIVERSITY, ZARIA

COURSE: POLS 810 CLASSICAL POLITICAL THEORY

TOPIC:

THE CONCEPT OF EQUALITY

BY

NUHU SAMAILA
P21SSPS8045

LECTURERS
DR. ISAH SAIDU

MAY, 2024
Abstract

This research work looked into the concept of equality. The study sourced it data from secondary
sources such as textbook, journals and internet based source. The research work adopted the
social Exchange and structural Functionalism theory. The research also looked at the origin of
equality, principles of equality, equality in the Nigerian context and factors that hinders equality
in Nigeria. The research recommended that areas like tribes; sex religion should not be criteria
for equal right employment in Nigeria. Committee should be form companies all zones to
formulate policies that will not be bias in employment opportunity in federal and state civil
services commission in Nigeria. Social equity should be put into action which will make it clear;
how broad ranging and fundamental the commitment to social equity is for partitions and
scholars. Stories of social equity should be put in films and video merging a single mothers
involving two jobs and still falling behind hold some prospect for mobbing watchers and
readers. It is important to dramatize social equity issues, to bring them to life. The research
concluded that Nigeria is not a poor country yet millions are living in hunger. The government
must work with the international community to get food and aid to hungry people now. But it
can’t stop there. It must free millions of Nigerians from poverty by building a new political and
economic system that works for everyone, not just a fortunate few.
INTRODUCTION

The terms ‘equality’, ‘equal’, and ‘equally’ signify a qualitative relationship. ‘Equality’ (or

‘equal’) signifies correspondence between a group of different objects, persons, processes or

circumstances that have the same qualities in at least one respect, but not all respects, i.e.,

regarding one specific feature, with differences in other features. ‘Equality’ must then be

distinguished from ‘identity’, which refers to one and the same object corresponding to itself in

all its features. For the same reason, it needs to be distinguished from ‘similarity’ the concept of

merely approximate correspondence. (Amartaya,2020).

Judgements of equality presume a difference between the things compared. According to this

definition, the notion of ‘complete’ or ‘absolute’ equality may be seen as problematic because

it would violate the presumption of a difference. Two non-identical objects are never

completely equal; they are different at least in their spatiotemporal location. If things do not

differ they should not be called ‘equal’, but rather, more precisely, ‘identical’, such as the

morning and the evening star. Here usage might vary. Some authors do consider absolute

qualitative equality admissible as a borderline concept (Charles, 2019).

THE CONCEPT OF EQUALITY

Equality is a state of affairs where every person has equal status, rights, and liberties. Social

equality stands, therefore, in opposition to societal settings where individuals face social

barriers because of some component of their social identity. This is a context of discrimination,

usually encountered by people who are not societally equal because of their race, sex, gender,

ethnicity, age, class, disability, or religion.(Dwarkin, 2017)

Equality is a state of affairs in which all individuals within society have equal rights, liberties,

and status, possibly including civil rights, freedom of expression, autonomy, and equal access to

certain public goods and social services. (Ibid)

‘Equality’ can be used in the very same sense both to describe and prescribe, as with ‘thin’:

“you are thin” and “you are too thin”. The approach taken to defining the standard of

comparison for both descriptive and prescriptive assertions of equality is very important. In the

descriptive case, the common standard is itself descriptive, for example when two people are

said to have the same weight. In the prescriptive use, the standard prescribes a norm or rule,

for example when it is said people ought to be equal before the law. (Fred,2015).

The standards grounding prescriptive assertions of equality contain at least two components.

On the one hand, there is a descriptive component, since the assertions need to contain

descriptive criteria, in order to identify those people to which the rule or norm applies. The

question of this identification – who belongs to which category? – may itself be normative, as

when we ask to whom the U.S. laws apply. On the other hand, the comparative standards

contain something normative – a moral or legal rule, such as the U.S. laws – specifying how

those falling under the norm are to be treated. Such a rule constitutes the prescriptive

component (Fayol, 2019).

Sociological and economic analyses of (in-)equality mainly pose the questions of how

inequalities can be determined and measured and what their causes and effects are. In

contrast, social and political philosophy is in general concerned mainly with the following
questions: what kind of equality, if any, should obtain, and with respect to whom and when?

Such is the case in this article as well.(Gooden, 2014).

For this reason, it helps to think of the idea of equality or inequality, in the context of social

justice, not as a single principle, but as a complex group of principles forming the basic core of

today’s egalitarianism. Different principles yield different answers. Both equality and inequality

are complex and multifaceted concepts. In any real historical context, it is clear that no single

notion of equality can sweep the field. Many egalitarians concede that much of our discussion

of the concept is vague, but they believe there is also a common underlying strain of important

moral concerns implicit in it. Above all, it serves to remind us of our common humanity, despite

various differences. In this sense, egalitarianism is often thought of as a single, coherent

normative doctrine that embraces a variety of principles. Following the introduction of different

principles and theories of equality, the discussion will return in the last section to the question

how best to define egalitarianism and its core value.(John, 2019).

PRINCIPLES OF EQUALITY

Equality in its prescriptive usage is closely linked to morality and justice, and distributive justice

in particular. Since antiquity equality has been considered a constitutive feature of justice. (On

the history of the concept, cf. Albernethy 1959, Benn 1967, Brown 1988, Dann 1975, Thomson

1949.) People and movements throughout history have used the language of justice to contest

inequalities. But what kind of role does equality play in a theory of justice? Philosophers have

sought to clarify this by defending a variety of principles and conceptions of equality. This

section introduces four such principles, ranging from the highly general and uncontroversial to
the more specific and controversial. The next section reviews various conceptions of the

‘currency’ of equality. Different interpretations of the role of equality in a theory of justice

emerge according to which of the four principles and metrics have been adopted. The first

three principles of equality hold generally and primarily for all actions upon others and affecting

others, and for their resulting circumstances. From the fourth principle onward, i.e., starting

with the presumption of equality, the focus will be mainly on distributive justice and the

evaluation of distribution. (John, 2011).

Formal Equality

When two persons have equal status in at least one normatively relevant respect, they must be

treated equally with regard in this respect. This is the generally accepted formal equality

principle that Aristotle articulated in reference to Plato: “treat like cases as like” (Aristotle,

Nicomachean Ethics, V.3. 1131a10–b15; Politics, III.9.1280 a8–15, III. 12. 1282b18–23). The

crucial question is which respects are normatively relevant and which are not. Some authors

see this formal principle of equality as a specific application of a rule of rationality: it is

irrational, because inconsistent, to treat equal cases unequally without sufficient reasons

(Berlin 1955–56). But others claim that what is at stake here is a moral principle of justice, one

reflecting the impartial and universalizable nature of moral judgments. On this view, the

postulate of formal equality demands more than consistency with one’s subjective preferences:

the equal or unequal treatment in question must be justifiable to the relevantly affected

parties, and this on the sole basis of a situation’s objective features.(Brara, 2014)

Proportional Equality
According to Aristotle, there are two kinds of equality, numerical and proportional (Aristotle,

Nicomachean Ethics, 1130b–1132b; cf. Plato, Laws, VI.757b–c). A way of treating others, or a

distribution arising from it, is equal numerically when it treats all persons as indistinguishable,

thus treating them identically or granting them the same quantity of a good per capita. That is

not always just. In contrast, a way of treating others or a distribution is proportional or

relatively equal when it treats all relevant persons in relation to their due. Just numerical

equality is a special case of proportional equality. Numerical equality is only just under special

circumstances, namely when persons are equal in the relevant respects so that the relevant

proportions are equal. Proportional equality further specifies formal equality; it is the more

precise and comprehensive formulation of formal equality. It indicates what produces an

adequate equality.(Richard, 2012).

Presumption of Equality

Many conceptions of equality operate along procedural lines involving a presumption of

equality. More materially concrete, ethical approaches, as described in the next section below,

are concerned with distributive criteria – the presumption of equality, in contrast, is a formal,

procedural principle of construction located on a higher formal and argumentative level. What

is at stake here is the question of the principle with which a material conception of justice

should be constructed, particularly once the approaches described above prove inadequate.

The presumption of equality is a prima facie principle of equal distribution for all goods

politically suited for the process of public distribution. In the domain of political justice, all

members of a given community, taken together as a collective body, have to decide centrally on
the fair distribution of social goods, as well as on the distribution’s fair realization. Any claim to

a particular distribution, including any existing distributive scheme, has to be impartially

justified, i.e., no ownership should be recognized without justification.

Applied to this political domain, the presumption of equality requires that everyone should get

an equal share in the distribution unless certain types of differences are relevant and justify,

through universally acceptable reasons, unequal shares.

ORIGIN OF EQUALITY

Time and again, with almost worrying ease, historical studies have revealed the incredibly

violent origins of various kinds of inequality. Those approaches that treat equality as a primary

concept of investigation predominantly Marxism, but also radical feminism, queer theory, and

postcolonialism are characterized by a methodological historicism that focuses on exposing the

historical sources of inequalities involving class, gender, sex, race, culture, or geography. A

great deal of theoretical attention has been placed on analyzing the various ways these

structures of inequality have been masked or concealed first and foremost by presenting

certain social structures and identityformations as natural and a-historical, and hence as pre- or

a-political. The historicity of the concept of equality itself, however that is to say, the question

how equality turned into a central object of political claims-making in the first place, and hence

how these concealments of inequality could be scandalized seems to have been largely

neglected.(John, 2011).

The varying presence of inequality throughout history has to do primarily with the varying

degree of scandal it involves. Tracing the principle of equality through history thus requires a
meticulous, comparative reconstruction of the fluctuating “scandalousness” that appearances

of inequality raised in different cultures at different [Link] do we explain that at certain

historical moments in a certain political culture the egalitarian view began to expand, whereas

other moments saw the emergence of blind spots within its field of vision? How come outrage

over certain forms of inequality erupted in certain junctures and receded in others? It appears,

however, that over and above these unending patterns of transformation, a certain fault line

can be traced. (Ibid)

At a certain point in the history of the West, there occurred a fundamental disturbance in the

mechanisms in charge of neutralizing the outrage over the absence of equality; of refracting

every egalitarian view by regarding every form of inequality as simply a natural difference. This

fault line is the advent of modernity. It can be located somewhere between Hobbes (1651),

who regarded the equality of human beings as a grim natural condition politics ought to

remedy, and Locke (1690), who elevated this natural, self-evident equality as what politics

ought to preserve. It is around that period that scandals over appearances of inequality turn

from episodic incidents.

EQUALITY IN NIGERIAN CONTEXT

Economic inequality in Nigeria has reached extreme levels, despite being the largest economy

in Africa. The country has an expanding economy with abundant human capital and the

economic potential to lift millions out of poverty. 5 millionThe combined wealth of Nigeria’s five

richest men - $29.9 billion - could end extreme poverty at a national level yet 5 million face
hunger. More than 112 million people are living in poverty in Nigeria, yet the country’s richest

man would have to spend $1 million a day for 42 years to exhaust his fortune.(Charles, 2019).

2 millionThe amount of money that the richest Nigerian man can earn annually from his wealth

is sufficient to lift 2 million people out of poverty for one year. 79%Women represent between

60 and 79 percent of Nigeria's rural labor force but are five times less likely to own their own

land than men. Women are also less likely to have had a decent education. Over three-quarters

of the poorest women in Nigeria have never been to school and 94% of them are illiterate.

(Gooden, 2014).

Between 1960 and 2005, about $20 trillion was stolen from the treasury by public office

holders. This amount is larger than the GDP of United States in 2012 (about $18 trillion).

Poverty and inequality in Nigeria are not due to a lack of resources, but to the ill-use,

misallocation and misappropriation of such resources. At the root is a culture of corruption

combined with a political elite out of touch with the daily struggles of average Nigerians. (Ibid).

57 millionIn 2012, Nigeria spent just 6.5 percent of its national budget on education and just

3.5 percent on health (by comparison, Ghana spent 18.5 percent and 12.8 percent respectively

in 2015). As a result, 57 million Nigerians lack safe water, over 130 million lack adequate

sanitation and the country has more than 10 million children out of school. 21.5%Another

consequence of the mismanagement of the nation’s resources is the high rate of

unemployment, especially among the young. In 2016, between 12.1% and 21.5% of Nigeria’s

youth were without a job.(Ibid).

During the year (1994) constitutional conference which was organised by Abacha’s Military

Government, equal rights in political appointment, and in the civil service were the major

issues. Conference members recognised the serious issue of the president of the Federal

Republic of Nigeria coming continuously from one section of the country or in the real sense

from a particular tribe. Also, they recognized the issues if the civil service being dominated by a

particular tribe In arriving at solutions to these national issues the constitutional conference

decided on rotational presidency between the North and the south. (Fred, 2015).

University admissions are still on quota basis. Employment ;n the federal public agencies are

also regulated to reflect federal character Recently, the Federal Military Government set up a

Federal Character committee to investigate the issues involved in maintaining a Federal

character and then to make recommendations to the military government. This committee is at

work now. (Ibid).

They were sworn in the month of March, [Link] major issue involved in equal rights is that

of equal employment opportunity for every-one in the country. The objective behind equal

employment opportunity is to eliminate discrimination. As we observed above it can lead to

adverse poverty. In Federal Government appointments some job levels must be advertised

during recruitment activities. In the U.S.A Federal Government contractors are even regulated

and must give affirmative information that employment activities in their organisations are not

discriminatory. (Ibid).

Nigerian politicians, Military or intellectuals, etc. started taking the issue of equal right very

serious due to cancellation of June 12, election 1993 which was won by Chief M K O Abiola a

Yoruba Tribe. The election which was observed by international organisations and the Nigerian
electoral commission and proclaimed fair by both agencies was later on cancelled by President

Ibrahim Babangida, a Northerner and Hausa tribe. Most of the Nigerian presidents since

independence have come from the North. In the forth coming presidential election of 1997/98

equal right may likely became a major issue. It is expected that the recommendations of the

Federal Character Committee which is now at work may go far in initiating actions which will

promote equal employment opportunities.(Fayol, 2019).

Hindrance To Equality in Nigeria

Disparate Discrimination in Employment: Disparate discrimination is the commonest and most

observable form of discrimination. If someone is treated differently from the way others are

treated may be because of sex, age, tribe, religion, national identity, etc. This is an aspect of

disparate discrimination.(Dwarkin, 2017)

Disparate Effect in Employment Relations

This type of discrimination occurs when any practice has an adverse effect or impact upon a

protected group. Where the Enugu State government for example passes an edict that only

those that have University education or qualification are eligible to seek employment or work in

a particular branch of the civil service; this edict could have disparate effect on women in Enugu

state. This is because only few women have got their university degrees in Enugu state.

Previously, women education was discouraged in Nigeria generally. Disparate effect exists in

many forms in Nigeria today. It is believed that women are suited for the work of secretary

typists, telephone operatress, receptionists, etc. These practices bring disparate effects on men.

(Ibid).
Present Effect of Past Discrimination in Employment

Some practices and procedures in some organisations or countries may appear to be neutral in

their face. This means that such procedures and practices may have positive intended goals. At

the same time they may have negative unintended goals. Such practices freeze prior

discrimination into present situation; such practices can be discontinued or modified. For

example, traditional rituals which the Christians have rejected previously can be reintroduced

into the church e.g. the reintroduction of Ozo title and chieftaincy systems. Such practices can

lead to certain discriminatory practices in the traditional villages. In Nigerian political scene the

Northerners are nominated mostly as presidential candidates and the southerners as vice-

presidential candidates. These practices were challenged in the just concluded constitutional

conference by the delegates recommending rotational presidential systems between the North

and Southern. (Ibid).

Sex Discrimination

Both men and women can be discriminated in the work place since the discrimination among

women is more rampant people tend to use women discrimination synonymously as sex

discrimination. In Nigeria sexdiscrimination has more to do with culture. In almost all the tribal

cultures in Nigerian society arrangements; practices and procedures don’t give women active

roles but passive roles, this situation has affected the formal educational institutions. As a result

of this educational deprivation, women have been hindered from occupying very high positions

in both the public and private sectors. (John, 2019).

Occupation and Salary Inequity

In Nigeria, one’s occupation affects one’s salary and wages. Occupation is a group of jobs that
are similar and can be found in other organizations throughout the Nation e.g. lecturing, legal

practice, medical doctors, receptionists, etc. Some occupations attract high salaries while

others attract low salaries, One can observe that in Nigerian Universities the annual salary of a

messenger may be less than one month salary of a deputy registrar or a senior lecturer. The

annual salaries of deputy registrars and senior lecturers may be far below those of junior

clerical officers in the banks and other commercial enterprises. (Ibid).

Tribal Discrimination

Nigerian tribalism is widely discussed in and outside the country. Nigeria has over 250

languages and dialects. However, it is widely written and discussed that three tribes exist in

Nigeria. These include Igbo, Yoruba and Hausa tribes. In short tribalism is a major problem

hindering Nigeria from attaining a high level integration and stability among its citizens. Tribal

problems are experienced in employment, University admission, religious organisations,

political appointments, sports representations, etc. So, tribal discrimination is a major social

issue in Nigerian and the contributions of the business sector in finding solutions to tribal

problems will be a major contribution to development.(Ibid).

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Social Exchange Theory

This theory proposes that individuals who perceive themselves as either under-rewarded or

over-rewarded will experience distress, and that this distress leads to efforts to restore equity

within the relationship. Equity is measured by comparing the ratios of contributions and

benefits of each person within the relationship. Partners do not have to receive equal benefits
(such as receiving the same amount of love, care, and financial security) or make equal

contributions (such as investing the same amount of effort, time, and financial resources), as

long as the ratio between these benefits and contributions is similar. Much like other prevalent

theories of motivation, such as Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, equity theory acknowledges that

subtle and variable individual factors affect each person’s assessment and perception of their

relationship with their relational partners. According to John in 2011 anger is induced by

underpayment inequity and guilt is induced with overpayment [Link] whether hourly

wage or salary, is the main concern and therefore the cause of equity or inequity in most cases.

In any position, an employee wants to feel that their contributions and work performance are

being rewarded with their pay. If an employee feels underpaid then it will result in the

employee feeling hostile towards the organization and perhaps their co-workers, which may

result in the employee not performing well at work anymore. It is the subtle variables that also

play an important role in the feeling of equity. Just the idea of recognition for the job

performance and the mere act of thanking the employee will cause a feeling of satisfaction and

therefore help the employee feel worthwhile and have better outcomes. Employees can also

feel positive inequity which may cause the worker to feel guilty and attempt to compensate for

those feelings of guilt.

Structural Functionalism

Structural functionalism, or simply functionalism, is "a framework for building theory that sees

society as a complex system whose parts work together to promote solidarity and stability".
This approach looks at society through a macro-level orientation, which is a broad focus on the

social structures that shape society as a whole, and believes that society has evolved like

[Link] approach looks at both social structure and social functions. Functionalism

addresses society as a whole in terms of the function of its constituent elements; namely

norms, customs, traditions, and institutions.

A common analogy called the organic or biological analogy, popularized by Herbert Spencer,

presents these parts of society as human body "organs" that work toward the proper

functioning of the "body" as a whole. In the most basic terms, it simply emphasizes "the effort

to impute, as rigorously as possible, to each feature, custom, or practice, its effect on the

functioning of a supposedly stable, cohesive system". For Talcott Parsons, "structural-

functionalism" came to describe a particular stage in the methodological development of social

science, rather than a specific school of thought.

Auguste Comte believed that society constitutes a separate "level" of reality, distinct from both

biological and inorganic matter. Explanations of social phenomena had therefore to be

constructed within this level, individuals being merely transient occupants of comparatively

stable social roles. In this view, Comte was followed by Émile Durkheim. A central concern for

Durkheim was the question of how certain societies maintain internal stability and survive over

time. He proposed that such societies tend to be segmented, with equivalent parts held

together by shared values, common symbols or (as his nephew Marcel Mauss held), systems of

exchanges. Durkheim used the term "mechanical solidarity" to refer to these types of "social

bonds, based on common sentiments and shared moral values, that are strong among
members of pre-industrial societies". In modern, complex societies, members perform very

different tasks, resulting in a strong interdependence. Based on the metaphor above of an

organism in which many parts function together to sustain the whole, Durkheim argued that

complex societies are held together by "solidarity", i.e. "social bonds, based on specialization

and interdependence, that are strong among members of industrial societies".

RECOMMENDATION

1. Tribalism is areas like tribes; sex religion should not be criteria for equal right employment in

Nigeria. Committee should be form companies all zones to formulate policies that will not be

bias in employment opportunity in federal and state civil services commission in Nigeria

[Link] equity should be put into action which will make it clear; how broad ranging and

fundamental the commitment to social equity is for partitions and scholars

[Link] of social equity should be put in films and video merging a single mothers involving

two jobs and still falling behind hold some prospect for mobbing watchers and readers. It is

important to dramatize social equity issues, to bring them to life.

CONCLUSION

Nigeria is not a poor country yet millions are living in hunger. The government must work with

the international community to get food and aid to hungry people now. But it can’t stop there.

It must free millions of Nigerians from poverty by building a new political and economic system

that works for everyone, not just a fortunate few.

REFERENCES
Amartya Sen, (2020) The Idea of Justice (Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University
Press.
Charles Beitz, (2019):Political Theory and International Relations, rev. ed. (Princeton, N.J.:
Princeton University Press,
Dworkin, R. (2017) ‘tacking sinful inequalities. Perspectives on polices 2(4) 671- 675
Fred, A. and George, (2005). The state of social equity in American

Fayol, H. (2019). General Principles of Management.” In c stores (trans.) General and Industrial
Management London: pitman
Gooden, susan and Samuel, L.M (2014). Social Equity in Public Affairs Education Journal of
Public Affairs Education 10:91-97
John R. (1971). A theory of justice. Harvard University press
John, E. R. (2019). Equality of Opportunity. Harvard university [Link]-moody S. and
musaeno, M. 2003). Cops. Teachers, counselors. Stories from the front lines of public service:
University of Michigan press.
John Rawls (2011). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, Ma: Harvard University press.

Richard, A. (2012) the level playing field conception. Standford universityRosenbloom, David, H
and James, D. C. (1990). Toward constitutional competence: A casebook for public
administration. Engle wood chiffs, nj: prentice Hall.

Brara, James, H and James, R. B. (2014). Filling in the skeletal pillar; Addressing social Equity in
introductory courses in public administration. Journal of public affairs education 10:99-109.

Shafritz, J.M. and Russell, E. W. (2005). Introducing Public Administration. Upper Saddle River,
N.J: Pearson Education Task force on inequality in America (American Political science
Association).