Equalitarianism aims at leveling people in all aspects. It is a doctrine that promotes equality before the Law, equal opportunities and, mainly, equality of results.
At first glance, it does not sound so bad. So, what would be the problem with this? Let's see:
Philosophically speaking, egalitarianism is a rejection of alterity (1), since the search for homogeneity negates differences. The egalitarianism prevents the person from arising by their own means, since it is based on leveling, on equalization. In an egalitarian society, progress is not possible, progress is not possible, divergence is not possible. Therefore, equality is not the same as egalitarianism, since there are fair and reasonable differences that should not be eliminated.
Excellence and improvement are incompatible with leveling. However, excellence requires equality, an obligation of equal treatment to all persons in the Law, and the need to provide mechanisms that favor equal opportunities. Equal opportunities serve so that in society the greatest number of people have access to health, education, culture and many other benefits, but it is different to guarantee equality of results.
A society with equal opportunities, is a society with a future, while an egalitarian society is doomed to failure. Deliberately confusing equality with egalitarianism is the central axis of the discourse of the new left.
We must aspire only to equality of rights, which is the true expression of freedom. Equality is synonymous with submission, to lock ourselves in a mold and join a social system where excel or be different is frowned upon.
