Equality stands for monotony

It must furthermore be borne in mind that equality stands for monotony and not for harmony. A harmonious melody can only be established by different unidentical musical tones. These tones must be assembled and have to follow in a certain sequence; otherwise they will result in chaos and not in melody.12 Human society presupposes such an inequality and unity. Thibon has seen very clearly this issue which can only be solved in the sign of love.

“It consists in purifying and organizing the inequalities from the point of view of a deeper equality, or, to put it more precisely, in making inequality serve unity. But this unity, what else is it but love and what is love without God.”13This clarification is quite necessary because many a good Christian — and that holds true for most of those living in the Western Hemisphere — has an unclear notion about human equality.14 The American Declaration of Independence mentions the fact that the human beings are “created equal.”* This is true in the theological sense, and in the theological sense only. Two newly born babes are equal before God whether their parents are white or colored, American or foreign, registered in the Virginia Blue Book or in the rogues gallery. This theological equality continues until the time comes when they commit morally responsible acts. Judas Iscariot and St. John the Evangelist were equally conceived in original sin and free from personal sin, but how different their end! Heaven and hell are not identical. It is actually the privilege of our environmental determinists to discard the terms “saint” and “sinner” and to supplant them by pragmatic expressions like “social-unsocial” or “adapted-unadapted.”

Dostoyevski prophesied this moral relativism in his chapter on the Grand Inquisitor (Brothers Karamazov), where he sees humanity declaring through the mouth of its science that there are no trespasses and no sinners but only “hungry people.”

From a purely human and material point of view we are utterly unequal — unequal in the eyes of our fellow men (which matters less) but also unequal from an absolute material standard. From that point of view we are not even born equal; the syphilitic babe and the healthy newcomer in this world are different in material quality. The stupid and the intelligent man or woman, the physically strong and the physically weak, the learned and the unlearned — they are all humanly unequal from the aspects compared. And of course there is also a hierarchy of characteristics. The Theist will give precedence to spiritual qualities over intellectual qualities, and most people will value intellect higher than mere bodily strength.

12 “For him the very image of beauty was inseparable from diversity. A society can be beautiful only if founded on truth, inequality and dissemblance. That was the axiom of the social philosophy of Leontieff.” — Nicolas Berdiaeff, Constantin Leontief, Paris, 1937.
13 Cf. Gustave Thibon, L’Inégalité, Facteur D’Harmonie Études Carmélitaines, autumn, 1939.
 14 Professor A. T. Hadley of Yale in his book The Conflict Between Liberty and Equality writes:

“In fact the signers of the Declaration of Independence can hardly have meant what they said to be taken literally. Most of them were aristocrats, many of them were slave-holders, some of them defended human slavery on principle. They were simply stating a theory of democratic government as it was understood in their time and as it had been expounded by the great prophet of modern democracy — Rousseau. In this theory great stress was laid on the contrast between the natural status of man as God had created him and the legal status which other men had imposed upon him. . .

 Whether such a state of nature had ever actually existed was a question about which neither Rousseau nor Jefferson nor Franklin greatly troubled themselves. The emphasis on historic fact as distinct from historic fiction is something quite modern.”

Erik Maria Ritter von Kuehnelt-Leddihn
The Menace of the Herd or
Procrustes at Large