The Empire of Equality

If there is one common value that seems to permeate the whole of society, reaching across the political spectrum, is that equability is an absolute imperative.

The Occupy Wall Street movement –RIP-, the Tea Party, the social democrats of Europe, the new right wings of the world and even Bolivarian socialism, all called together to a more equal world.

In fact, if we for a moment recall any major social battle of the last decade the cry of one side, or the other, and even both is that the playfield needs to be leveled. No one questions this ultimate call, not for what it means materially or the implications of the concept itself, all remains vague. What is equality?

There are two general positions in regards of what the concept of equality is, and what its pursuit involves.

• 
  

  First, the Teleological equalitarian, for whom inequality is negative in its material aspects, thus equality is sought for the results it would bring. Manly any sort of utilitarian school identifies with this notion.

  
  


• 
  

  Second, the Deontological equalitarian, for whom equality is a value, dictated by a moral imperative which goes beyond mere results.

  
  

Now how can this concern the modern world? First I would contest that the second position is almost extinct. Moralist these days are reclusive entities that live as refugees in Universities around the world. This leaves the first position as dominant.

This purely material interpretation cuts to the core of the futurist idea about the end of scarcity. Under this view, the new forces of production will create an overflow of goods that combine with automated logistics chains could fulfill the needs of populations center around the globe. I accept that it is a simplistic rendering of the idea, but serves to illustrate its blind spot.

A purely materialistic notion of the idea scarcity, leaves out, how power concentrates too around specific social structures and institutions. Is in this process where the figure of Tocqueville becomes ever more relevant.

In the second volume of “Democracy in America” he writes “Is the same equality which frees each citizen from one and other that surrenders him, alone and without defense, to the actions of the majority”. (Alexis, Tocqueville. La Democracia en América. 6th ed. 2. Madrid: Alianza Editorial S.A., 1999. 23. Print). Here we can see how the blind pursuit for equality works detrimentally against freedom.

I propose that at its core the idea of a world beyond scarcity comes from the search of a leaderless society. The utilitarian view of politics is that is a byproduct of the need of organization in order to administrate finite resources, tolerated at the most. The conclusion being that if every material need is fulfill, in an automated process, the politician as a necessary entity ceases to exist.

This fantasy of automated cities is almost Marxian in its conception. Since for Marx the dictatorship of the proletarian would socialize the means of production, concluding in a social organization beyond the need of an Estate, thus ending any forms of privileges, material ones of course since Marxism is strictly a material view of the world.

Of course the vacuum would be replaced by another figure of authority, the mass. Once again I go back to Tocqueville “As the citizens become more similar and their situation leveled, the tendency to rely or believe in an individual or class extinguishes. In turn the individual increases its dependence on the opinion of the mass which ends conducting the world” (Alexis, Tocqueville. La Democracia en América. 6th ed. 2. Madrid: Alianza Editorial S.A., 1999. 21. Print).

To conclude, this blind materialistic position which pursues equality by focusing on the results is detrimental to the freedom of the individual. We see this every day when elections are decided by how polls tilt on narrow issues, and little by little we let ourselves go to the rule of the mass ending the private exercise of thinking.

The Role of Piracy

Since the dawn of the new era there has been one phenomenon that has eluded any attempt to restrain it, piracy. As the internet became ever more present in the life of society information flow has serve as the main drive of progress, and with it file sharing and other forms of copyright infringement have evolve.

This is to the detriment of the global economy, we are told. Wherever there is a discussion about the role of the internet, the subject of piracy is at the core of the argument. Pressure from the WTO and other similar organization accompanies all those countries where piracy is rampant, and where copyright laws do not extend to the digital sphere.

This is specially so in Latin America, where piracy is not some alter economy is the main force. Every time some new trade agreement was to be sign or some diplomat from a develop nation would visit the country I was born, Bolivia, the recurrent image of heavy machinery destroying piles of pirated DVD’s would run on the papers, showing “the fight against piracy”.

While this show of law and order was being display on the media, pirate copies of the latest blockbuster movie could be found outside the very theaters featuring them. Why is this? Is it possible that there is so little respect for property among developing nations or perhaps, we down here just don’t understand how the market works.

Of course the answer is neither. Every time an illegal activity just continues despite efforts from local institutions to suppress it a deeper force is having an impact, the economy reaches farther than the boundaries of legality.

Piracy as a whole is the answer that comes to level the plain field for those outside the develop world. Only in advance economies where disposable income is a constant for the average household, can a formal digital economy thrive.

Even with the recent economic boost, drive by the price of commodities, most of my region still struggles to provide some basic needs. Pluming, electricity, education are still not the norm in the lives of a substantial part of the population.

Is in this environment where piracy comes to the rescue. The global economy of today demands that every professional and most workers have some basic understanding of informatics. The market dictates so, but fails to provide the tools.

In order to understand this, one must only look at the price of the basic Microsoft Office which runs at 139.99 US dollars. That is half the minimums’ wage for workers in Argentina, Brazil and Chile and tree time for Bolivia. Even if you could afford this one application there are several others taht any professional needs in order to be competitive.

This is why the region as a whole relies on piracy. The price is just too high from most people living here, and yet the outside pressure demands these skills without giving a solution to needs of the local society. It is through piracy that the individuals living on the periphery of the global economy can belong.

This is true for more than just professional life. A global society demands the reception of culture in order to form a bond with those outside our immediate reach.

After all global pop culture spreads using the web. Digital distribution and online streaming creates a common ground where individuals of all nationalities can interact with the outside, but this could not be possible if all were limited to acquire entertainment using legal channels exclusively.

The recent explosion of Korean Pop music is possible because piracy allows the content to reach a public otherwise excluded by its economic situation. This is also true for videogames, movies and any form of digital media.

The current emergence of a global culture, where shared attributes permeate beyond individual nationality, race, gender and even faith is half possible by piracy, reaching those who cannot afford to belong.

As long as the market cannot come with a proper answer for those who live on the out squirts of economic progress, piracy will rule digital distribution. After all, is not the fault the individual is the failure of the global economy as a whole.