Clinton’s Constitutional Alarm: The Dogma of Equality, By Chris Knight (Florida)
On MSNBC's "Morning Joe," Hillary Clinton sounded a klaxon: The bedrock American creed — "all men and women are created equal" — is allegedly under siege from a Right-wing crusade to rewind progress, erase history, and resurrect a white, male-dominated mythos that "never was." Her words, aired September 24, 2025, paint conservatives as enemies of the Constitution's 238-year march toward a "more perfect union," targeting slavery's scars, suffrage's gains, and inconvenient truths for erasure. What if Clinton's right for the wrong reason? What if men, women, and races aren't "equal" but incommensurable, unrankable on a single metric? Not a case for superiority, but a rejection of her universalist yardstick? This discussion dives into Clinton's claim, probes the incommensurability thesis, and asks: Is equality's defence a noble stand or a flawed premise producing division?
Clinton's Case: Equality in the Crosshairs?
Clinton's "Morning Joe" riff is vintage progressive panic: The Right, she warns, is gunning for the Declaration's core, that "all men are created equal," to rollback civil rights, women's gains, and historical honesty. She points to "writing out" slavery and suffrage from museums and parks, a nod to battles over Confederate statues (130+ removed since 2020) and school curricula (CRT bans in 28 states by 2025). Her fear? A retro utopia "dominated by white men of a certain persuasion" (i.e. Christian) shredding America's "work in progress" toward inclusivity.
The Right's pushback on "woke" history isn't always surgical. Some moves, like Florida's 2022 Stop WOKE Act, curb teachings on systemic racism, risking a sanitised past. X buzzes with conservative calls to "focus on unity," but 2024 saw 20+ school boards pull books on slavery or gender, per PEN America. Museum fights, e.g., Virginia's 2023 bid to reframe Civil War exhibits, fuel her narrative. And Trump's 1776 Commission (revived 2025) pitches patriotic history, sidelining "divisive" topics like redlining. To Clinton, this is erasure, a threat to the "we the people" mosaic.
But her framing's slippery. She paints the Right as a monolith, ignoring its spectrum, from MAGA firebrands to libertarian sceptics. And her supposed "warts and all" love for America glosses over her side's own revisionism: toppling Lincoln statues (Portland, 2020) or renaming schools (San Francisco's 2021 "equity" purge) isn't exactly fidelity to history. X users jab back: "Clinton cries about erasing history while Dems cancel Abe," one post (15k likes) snarked. Her "white men" bogeyman? It sidesteps how progressives' identity politics, CRT, DEI, can vilify entire demographics, fuelling backlash.
Incommensurability, Not Inequality
Clinton's premise, that equality is a universal metric under attack, might be flawed in principle. What if men, women, and races are incommensurable, unrankable on a single scale? Not unequal, not superior, just different, like apples and oranges. This voids Clinton's hierarchy (and any superiority claims), rendering her "crosshairs" warning misguided.
Philosophically, incommensurability tracks. British philosopher Isaiah Berlin's pluralism posits values (or groups) can't always be measured by one yardstick, liberty vs. equality, say, or male vs. female strengths. Biologically, men and women diverge: Men average 10-15% more muscle mass; women outscore on verbal and emotional intelligence tasks (Stanford, 2023). Races? Genetic variance exists, sickle-cell prevalence in African ancestry, Ashkenazi carrier risks, but IQ or "worth" rankings are statistical noise, not destiny. Socially? Cultures shape outcomes; East Asian collectivism boosts academic scores (PISA 2024), but Western individualism sparks innovation. Trying to "equalize" these on one axis, Clinton's implied metric, flattens complexity.
Her error? Assuming equality means sameness. The Declaration's "created equal" is about rights, not outcomes, equal dignity, not identical traits. Incommensurability doesn't imply superiority; it defies ranking altogether. Clinton's "white men" jab ignores this, casting difference as threat. Meanwhile, progressive policies, affirmative action (still active in 37 states), gender quotas, force a one-size-fits-all "equity" that can alienate as much as unite.
The Real Threat: Duelling Revisionisms, Not Just the Right
Clinton's half-right: The Right's history tweaks—banning "divisive concepts" (Texas, 2023), defunding "woke" exhibits, can whitewash. But the Left's no saint. Their revisionism, erasing "problematic" figures (Jefferson, 2021 school renamings), mandating DEI lenses, rewrites just as aggressively. Both sides risk the Constitution's spirit: The Right by sanitising, the Left by sermonising. X threads rage: "Dems want equality but erase anyone who disagrees," (20k retweets) quipped, citing YouTube's 2021-2023 COVID censorship, admitted in 2025.
The incommensurability lens clarifies: Neither side's "equality" fight, Right's "colourblind" push, Left's "equity" crusade, fully grapples with human difference. Forcing sameness (or erasing it) fuels division, not union. 2025's culture wars, 61% of Americans fear free speech erosion (Gallup), show the stakes. Clinton's "pause" on progress? It's a tug-of-war, both sides yanking the Constitution's threadbare fabric.
Fighting Back: A Pluralist Path Forward
If men, women, and races are incommensurable, and superiority's a dead-end, how do we dodge Clinton's dystopia? A playbook for 2025's fractured union:
1. Embrace Pluralism: Teach history raw, slavery, suffrage, triumphs, sins. Ban neither CRT nor "patriotic" edits; let schools debate both. Florida's 2025 curriculum shift, primary sources over narratives, cut complaints 30%.
2. Defend Equal Rights, Not Outcomes: Codify equal treatment under law, SCOTUS's 2023 affirmative action ban set precedent. Ditch quotas; meritocracy resonates (68% voter support, Pew 2025).
3. Call Out Both Sides: Right's revisionism (book bans) and Left's (DEI dogma) need checks. Fund neutral watchdogs, FIRE's 2025 campus speech index exposed 20% faculty self-censorship.
4. Amplify Difference, Not Division: Celebrate incommensurability, men's, women's, cultural strengths, without ranking.
5. Restore Discourse: Protect speech to debate "equality." Texas's 2021 social media law, upheld 2024, curbs Big Tech's narrative lock. DOJ's 2025 Trusted News Initiative suit targets collusion.
History Erasure Right's "white male" revisionism Both sides rewrite (statues, CRT) Raw history, primary sources
Clinton's half-right: The Right's history tweaks threaten the Constitution's arc. But her "all created equal" rallying cry stumbles, men, women, races may be incommensurable, unrankable. Superiority's a red herring; the real fight is over whose frame rules. Both sides' revisionisms, the Right's sanitising, the Left's sermonising, risk the "more perfect union." 2025's a pivot: Trump's DOJ, X's raw pulse, and voter fatigue (61% want compromise, Gallup) offer a shot to reset. Embrace difference, defend rights, ditch dogmas.
Comments