Equality? Equity? Or Liberation? -- a discussion of a dystopian story “Harrison Bergeron”

“Harrison Bergeron” is a dystopian science-fiction short story that’s filled with humor and satirizes an ideal society that can never be achieved. This story is written by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr, and was first published in October 1961. The author described an imaginary world with absolute equality for every individual in the United States. For those who are superior to average standards in either appearance, intelligence, or physical fitness, it is mandatory for them to wear handicaps which bring down excellence to mediocrity in order to make everyone feel safe and equal. In either this story or the real world, although equality offers the same opportunities for everyone, it restricts creativity and breaks down potentials. Absolute equality can never be achieved as long as there are still people born unequal in social status, looks, and intelligence quotients. In today’s world, there’s a fine line between equality and equity and tyranny, especially when the ruler has an unlimited extent of power and dominion. It is the individual’s realization of reality and their determination of rebellion when the situation seems not right. Otherwise, a perfect idea of creating equality or equity could cease the development of the modern world, which is a terribly vast black hole that drives a true liberation farther and farther. 

The existence of two concepts - equality and equity, raises discussion over whether they are healthy for a fully functioning society. According to the definitions of the terms in the New Oxford American Dictionary, "equality" is to give everyone the same resources no matter who he or she is, no matter what status or foundational resources he or she has, therefore, this fantasy would only work if everyone starts from the same place. On the other hand, "equity" means fairness under any condition by giving people various amounts of support in order to put people from different social classes on one stage. The difference between these two concepts is intricate but clear about two different scenarios in an equal world. Since the society would offer every individual the same, people with high status would prefer equality since they certainly do not want to share the same facilities with the poor. But as for those whose living standards are low, they would prefer equity since they would gain more and catch up to the average. These two ideal societal condition shows the potential of a friendly world with no more competition. But can this be truly achieved? 

“ The year was 2081, and everybody was finally equal… Nobody was smarter than anybody else. Nobody was better looking than anybody else. Nobody was stronger or quicker than anybody else…” 

The first sentence in “Harrison Bergeron” begins the illustration of an imaginary world where all the impossible equalities become real. In most people’s mind, equality seems like a perfect state in which no one can be left out by the others — however, people are always misguided by this ideology and inequality is created as a result.  In this story, the author amplified this idea to the highest degree and used abundant details showing how cold-blooded and sad the world would be under this circumstance. 

“And it was in that clammy month that the H-G men took George and Hazel Bergeron's fourteen-year-old son, Harrison, away. It was tragic, all right, but George and Hazel couldn't think about it very hard. Hazel had a perfectly average intelligence, which meant she couldn't think about anything except in short bursts. And George, while his intelligence was way above normal, had a little mental handicap radio in his ear. He was required by law to wear it at all times. It was tuned to a government transmitter. Every twenty seconds or so, the transmitter would send out some sharp noise to keep people like George from taking unfair advantage of their brains.” 

This section reveals the price people pay in exchange for equality in this dystopian world. Harrison’s imprisonment, George’s obedience to wearing the handicaps, and the innocence of Hazel illustrate the numbness of people. It is clear to see that they had been poisoned and brainwashed for such a long time that they already believe that this is the normal way to live. This inhuman and pessimistic system wipes away the basic choice of those over-average people to exceed others and earn a better living. In this case, the inequality is obvious to see that even those who compromise are still under the pressure of sacrificing themselves. 

Although people say that “All men are created equal”, there is, in fact, a common misinterpretation of this statement. All men are created equal, true, but not all men are born equal. In today’s society, a social status already defines how much resources and assets a person could expect even before they are born. The divergence of a family's assets shows what height their children could reach in the future. Can people say that this inherent superiority is unequal and we have to change that? All these assets are earned by years and years of hard work and the accumulation of knowledge of their parents or even ancestors, and when they pass those advantages to their children, it is their right to decide that their children deserve a life they worked hard for. Nevertheless, when someone is trying to cut off this concession, inequality appears. No longer do only the average need for equality, but also those of a higher level. Fortune is controlled by one’s determination and motivation instead of equal distribution. When people are forced to be like this, all the privileges are eliminated, so are innovations, creativities, and Extraordinaries. When a society is absent from competition, the push for the society to move forward is absent as well. Just like Darwin’s theory of evolution, those who aren't born with ability or with few resources, only climbing and proving can save them. 

In a nutshell, the idea of equality and equity does promise innumerable benefits. But until the day when all people are born equal, it would be best to pause and think about every consequence of choosing the wrong path to reach that end. A social issue like this will never stop being debated, and it is our duty to at least understand the possible effects. The downfall of a utopian world is that we could never ever see the ending since no one has ever lived there, which makes it even more tempting and dangerous.