Has "Equity" Been Redefined By The Liberal Left, Before Our Eyes?

In every generation words evolve to take on a slightly different meaning and purpose. From biblical historical linguistic studies one can readily see this sort of evolution in word usage development. Thus the plight of the biblical expositor is to not only make sure of the "sitz-im-Leben" or the context and the historical setting, but also to shore up the correct meaning of words in the particular generation discussed and clarify the usage of terms associated with that setting. Failure to do so could result in historical synchronism, in which meanings of words specific to one generation, are either inadvertently or deliberately smuggled into another generation to create a completely different story than was originally intended.

There are words that we currently use in society that have experienced this same sort of "evolution". One such word is "equity".

What Is "EQUITY" And What Does It Mean?

As we will see below, one of the definitions of equity, is simply fairness in treatment. For example: If there is a job to be done requiring a hammer, and hammers are being distributed, one should be distributed to all those doing the job. To provide hammers to only them who appear to need a hammer is not equitable. Distributing hammers to only those who the supervisors want on site is also not equitable. This is where the train seems to come off the rails as I will explain.

Liberal Left Redefinition

For quite some time the term "equity" has seemingly been a theme song of the liberal political and social left. The word, as it is used today in political and social settings, is undergirded by theories of racial disparity and the inescapable boogeyman of "systemic racism" and in particular "white supremacy". When the liberal elite use the term "equity" in modern times, they are all but saying that America is unfair because of racism and her racist history. It is this history that has cemented outcomes in everything that is based on racism (white supremacy in particular) and the only way to be fair, is to assure the same outcomes in everything to everyone because racism has placed insurmountable obstacles, even if invisible, in front of whole groups of individuals therefore making every effort inequitable.

PROOF

I haven't seen or read too many Black people, political, religious or not, who undertake the discussion of this issue publicly and outside of politically liberal circles. But it seems that many Black leaders, especially political leaders, have taken on a determination to redefine the word and term "equity" for popularity, social acceptance and political gain.

Once such example of this is the usage of the word by Kamala Harris. Because Vice President Kamala Harris is a lawyer, and understands the use of words very well, I have paid special attention to what she says and how she says it. Paying attention is the only way we can really know what someone is talking about. Outside of heated conflicts, people normally don't say things they don't mean unless they are liars.

O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things?
for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. ~ Mt. 12:34

I don't believe Kamala is a liar, therefore, I will have to believe what she says and take her at her word. So what does Kamala say about "equity"?

"Equality is about giving people the resources and support they need so that everyone can be on equal footing and compete on equal footing. Equitable treatment means we all end up at the same place" ~ "The Big Difference Between Equality and Equity" Kamala Harris Facebook

While that didn't sound right and or correct to me, the first thing I asked was, is this true?

I do this sort of thing. Why? For starters I may be wrong in my understanding and need to check it out. Secondly, anyone who knows me also knows I used to read the Dictionary like any other book. The Dictionary was a novel to me so far as the usage and implementation of words. I did this in grade school and it kind of followed me throughout life. I don't consider myself to be a wordsmith by any means, but most times, I have a good idea and understanding of what is being said and what is meant by what is said and  I tend to have somewhat of a grip on the usage of a word in certain circumstances. Most times...

When I found that VP Harris had been so gracious enough to define the term, or at least to begin to unravel its meaning from a liberal political and social perspective, the first thing I did was consult dictionaries as to how the term or word had been traditionally and currently defined. Here is what I found: 

Equity:

One clear use of the term and word "equity" involved a share or portion of property or the value associated with a share or portion of property. That definition we will kind of set aside to look at the more philosophical meaning of the word, as its philosophical or social and political meaning is actually what is being referred to.

Here are 4 resources I used to examine this word:  

I: The American Heritage Dictionary:
* The state or quality of being just and fair.
* Something that is just and fair.
* Justice achieved not simply according to the strict letter of the law but in accordance with principles of substantial justice and the unique facts of the case.

II: Merrian Webster gives a definition, but also a summary and explanation of EQUITY as follows:
"Equity usually appears in courts of law as a term related to justice or proportional fairness, or in financial offices to property or one's share of a company. The derivative root of the noun, which gained stability in the English language during the 1300s, is Latin aequus, meaning "even," "fair," or "equal"; however, to be fair, it was introduced to English by the French, whose adaptation of the Latin was equité. The French word has clear legal connotations; it means "justice" or "rightness," and those meanings, plus a splash of "fairness," carried over to the English word equity. Noah Webster, himself a lawyer, notes the legal term equity of redemption in his 1828 dictionary defining it as "the advantage, allowed to a mortgager, of a reasonable time to redeem lands mortgaged, when the estate is of greater value than the sum for which it was mortgaged." This use led to the modern financial meanings of equity: "the value of a piece of property after any debts that remain to be paid are subtracted" and "a share in a company or of a company's stock."

Stopping there...it seems that equity, so far as a philosophical concept, is rooted in legal theory and carries a sense of "fairness" or rightness or being right in relationship to circumstance and in relationship to an outcome. I DO NOT find anything that deals with "outcome" or end point in and of itself. But I do find strong inference to fairness in attempting to arrive at whatever end or outcome that develops.

Let's go further...

III: Dictionary.com says this:
3. the policy or practice of accounting for the differences in each individual’s starting point when pursuing a goal or achievement, and working to remove barriers to equal opportunity, as by providing support based on the unique needs of individual students or employees."

It seems Dictionary.com concludes that at least part of the definition of "equity" involves removing barriers that provide equal opportunity. They stop short of saying anything regarding equal outcomes or results. Let's look at at least one more...

IV: Cambridge Dictionary Online says this:
"...the situation in which everyone is treated fairly according to their needs and no group of people is given special treatment:..."

Cambridge deals with treatment of the word to indicate fairness or rightness in process as well. There is no indication that the word deals with outcome and or results or as Kamala has said, "Equitable treatment means we all end up at the same place". From both the historic and modern use of the word, "outcome", is not the issue. It is fairness of treatment along the way, or simply, insuring a fair path to an outcome. That appears to be of importance and significance of the word "equity". I find that "ending up at the same place" or outcomes, DO NOT appear to have anything to do with the term "equity" as Kamala and many others, as especially the liberal and politically left, use it today within society. Although there is some "convergence", as I have and will point out, I would tend to believe that the theory of "same outcomes" is not equity, but is more in line with socialism or democratic socialist constructs. Therefore, I conclude that use of the word in the manner in which Kamala and many others use it in modern times, is an attempt to REDEFINE the word and its character and make it another, more palatable way of asserting both political, social and ultimately economic socialism.

Now, that is a lot. I understand. Many of my most ardent readers are not given to detail along this line. However, I believe that we must be given to not only hearing what is being said, but actually understanding what is being said as opposed to placing what we wish to hear on top of what someone is saying.

Socialism I have not given a definition of socialism in this article. Socialism, which appears in many different and various forms, many say is the step-brother of Communism, and as a concept is an ideal rooted in the equalization and empowering of the "common man" at best. Under socialism class and caste is eliminated, the common man is exalted against the aristocrat and in the end both and all are equal. The wealthy surrender their wealth, or at the very least make that wealth accessible to the poor, and the poor are raised until there are no status differences. "Your money is MY money". Even if I don't work or set forth an effort, the success of YOUR work belongs to me, and we share the same things and access to the same things equally. Under socialism all individuals are ultimately given the ability to do and experience the same things...in short...outcomes are the same. YOU do the work, and if I chose not to work at all, WE share the same benefit! Oversimplified, but this is the essence of socialism. Could it be that the left leaning liberal elite have found a way to redefine a word to make those who are not left leaning believe that the word has always meant what they claim it mean, while attempting to sneak socialism in on a platter that they believe everyone will eat off of? Most Americans and free people who really understand this will reject Communism, which is the maturity and natural outgrowth of socialism, but it seems society is ripe for socialism, because the rich and the White supremacy elite are the enemies and according to them, have oppressed everyone else so much until equality is not and will never ben enough...they must give up their goods to make this right! It is interesting that many times, this sentiment comes from wealthy Black elite, who are the Boule leaders of modern society.

Color Communism & Common Sense

Another thing I have noticed is that the liberal left tends to do things to make others feel odd for opposing what they do and implement. Recently Kamala Harris, responding to criticism levied by Donald Trump, responded that what he was saying and what others were saying about her was "weird" which was met with laughter and cheers...but that is another story. Conclusion

Although, I don't believe I will use this space to go any further on the topic, I would invite you to further study the issue of "equity" and parity and how those words and concepts behind those words are evolving both politically and socially. I am not fooled in the least by Kamala's rhetoric, nor the rhetoric of the left leaning liberal elite, but unfortunately many within the Black community in particular have been seduced and even hypnotized by these political magicians and incessant, inept news media outlets delivering consistent falsehoods to the masses. Notice they only "fact check" things they don't want you to believe, and most of the fact checkers are part of the liberal elite culture with an aim to make you and I think that up is down, and right is wrong. All I can say is thank GOD for revelation and deliverance!

Blessed!

Here are some additional resources:

The American Journal Of Law and Equality: Equality vs. Equity

Annie E Casey Foundation: What's the difference between Equity and Equality?

"Equal­i­ty requires that every­one receives the same resources and oppor­tu­ni­ties, regard­less of cir­cum­stances and despite any inher­ent advan­tages or dis­ad­van­tages that apply to cer­tain groups. Equi­ty, on the oth­er hand, con­sid­ers the spe­cif­ic needs or cir­cum­stances of a per­son or group and pro­vides the types of resources need­ed to be successful."