A political regime in which all members of a society would get strictly equal amount of crucial material goods. The main problem for advocates of such a model is to determine what is exactly the good in respect of which all people should be equal. According to some of them everyone should be equally happy, according to others every person should have at his disposal equal amount of primary goods - which are things everyone needs for decent living regardless of a kind of life chosen, according too the third ones everyone should enjoy not only equal quantity of such goods but also equal power to use them, according to the fourth version all humans must have equal chance to attain happiness, and the like. In short, strict equality may be a meaningful ideal only if it is clearly specified in which respect people should be equal. But then it is necessary to propose a kind of equality that does not have unacceptable consequences. For instance, to make everyone happy would also mean to help ambitions of psychopaths who enjoy only if they torture others; to supply everyone with equal amount of primary goods would imply that handicapped people must be less happy because they have to spend more resources than others just to attain (if at all!) the level of ordinary functioning, etc. No agreement has been yet obtained concerning the fact which variant of egalitarianism is the best one.

<<back