What is another word for equalitarian?

Pronunciation: [ˌiːkwəlɪtˈe͡əɹi͡ən] (IPA)

"Equalitarian" is a term that refers to a person or group that advocates for equality and fairness in society. There are several synonyms that can be used to describe this concept, including egalitarian, equalist, and equalitarianism. Egalitarianism is the belief that all people should be treated equally, regardless of their race, gender, or social status. An equalist is someone who is committed to promoting equality and fairness in their community. Overall, these terms all reflect the idea that everyone should be treated equally and with respect, regardless of their differences.

Synonyms for Equalitarian:

What are the hypernyms for Equalitarian?

A hypernym is a word with a broad meaning that encompasses more specific words called hyponyms.

What are the opposite words for equalitarian?

Equalitarian is a term that refers to an ideology that advocates for equality in all aspects of social, economic, and political life. Its antonyms include autocratic, elitist, hierarchical, and discriminatory. Autocratic refers to a system that is ruled by a single leader who exercises absolute power, often at the expense of the rights and freedoms of the people. Elitist implies a belief in the inherent superiority of a small group of people who are born into position or expertise. Hierarchical refers to a system that follows a top-down structure based on levels of power and status. Discriminatory implies unfair treatment based on race, gender, religion, or other factors. These antonyms are indicative of ideologies that promote inequality and discrimination, concepts that are opposed to equalitarianism.

What are the antonyms for Equalitarian?

Usage examples for Equalitarian

Although the courts had usually interpreted the Constitution so as to support segregation, much of that document's language supported democratic and equalitarian principles.
"The Black Experience in America The Immigrant Heritage of America"
Norman Coombs
Had he been "My lord," I had been happier; no, I am no equalitarian.
"The Works of Robert Louis Stevenson - Swanston Edition Vol. 24 (of 25)"
Robert Louis Stevenson Other: Andrew Lang
What is there specially equalitarian, for instance, in calling your political friends and even your political enemies by their Christian names in public?
"Appreciations and Criticisms of the Works of Charles Dickens"
G. K. Chesterton

Famous quotes with Equalitarian

  • The policy of plunder was the cornerstone for the welfare of the German people and a major guarantor of their political loyalty, which was first and foremost based on material considerations. The unshakable alliance between the state and the people was not primarily the result of cleverly conceived party propaganda. It was created by means of theft, with the spoils being redistributed according to equalitarian principles among the member of the ethnically defined .
    Götz Aly
  • It was only the Soviet régime became unmistakably totalitarian that English intellectuals, in large numbers, began to show an interest in it. Burnham, although the English russophile intelligentsia would repudiate him, is really voicing their secret wish: the wish to destroy the old, equalitarian version of Socialism and usher in a hierarchical society where the intellectual can at last get his hands on the whip.
    George Orwell
  • I have never believed that the securing of material resources ought to form the central interest of human life—but have instead maintained that is an independent flowering of the intellect and emotions wholly apart from the struggle for existence. Formerly I accepted the archaic dictum that only a few can be relieved of the engulfing waste of the material struggle in its bitterest form—a dictum which is, of course, true in an agricultural age having scanty resources. Therefore I adopted an aristocratic attitude; regretfully arguing that , in any degree of fulness, is only for the fortunate few whose ancestors' prowess has given them economic security and leisure. But I did not take the bourgeois position of praising struggle for its own sake. While recognising certain worthy qualities brought out by it, I was too much impressed by its stultifying attributes to regard it as other than a necessary evil. In my opinion, only the leisured aristocrat really had a chance at —nor did I despise him because he was not forced to struggle. Instead, I was sorry that so few could share his good fortune. The condition was Millions of men must go to waste in order that a few might really live. Still—if those few were not upheld, no high culture would ever be built up. I never had any use for the American pioneer's worship of These things are necessary in their place, but not ends in themselves—and any attempt to make them ends in themselves is essentially uncivilised. Thus I have no fundamental meeting-ground with the rugged Yankee individualist. I represent rather the mood of the agrarian feudalism which preceded the pioneering and capitalistic phases. My ideal of life is , but simply . . . Well—so much for the past. Now we live in an age of easy abundance which makes possible the fulfilment of all moderate human wants through a relatively slight amount of labour. What shall be the result? Shall we still make resources when there is really a plethora of them? Shall we allow antique notions of allocation—"property," etc.—to interfere with the rational distribution of this abundant stock of resources among all those who require them? Shall we so fatuously as to on people who do not need to bear them, through the perpetuation of a set of now irrelevant and inapplicable rules of allocation? What objection is there to an intelligent centralised control of resources whose primary object shall be the elimination of want in every quarter—a thing possible without removing comfortable living from any one now enjoying it? To call the allocation of resources something "uncontrollable" by man—and in an age when virtually natural forces are harnessed and utilised—is simply infantile. It is simply that those who now have the lion's share don't want any fresh or rational allocation. It is needless to say that no sober thinker envisages a workless equalitarian paradise. Much work remains, and human capacities differ. High-grade service must still receive greater rewards than low-grade service. But amidst the present abundance of goods and minimisation of possible work, there must be When society give a man work, it must keep him comfortable without it; but it must give him work if it can, and must compel him to perform it when it is needed. This does not involve interference with life and habits (contrary to what some reactionaries say), . . . But of course the real need of change comes not from the mere fact of abundant resources, but from the growth of conditions making it impossible for millions to have any chance of getting resources under the present outworn set of artificial rules. This development is no myth. Machines had displaced 900,000 men in the U. S. the crash of '29, and no conceivable regime of "prosperity" (where by a people will have abundant and flexible resources and successfully exchange them among one another) will ever make it possible to avoid the permanent presence of of unemployed, so long as old-fashioned laissez-faire capitalism is adhered to. . . . And so I have readjusted my ideas. … I have gone almost reluctantly—step by step, as pressed by facts too insistent to deny—and am still quite as remote from Belknap's naive Marxism as I am from the equally naive Republican orthodoxy I have left behind. I am as set as ever against any upheaval—and believe that nothing of the kind is necessary in order to achieve a new and feasible equilibrium. The best of culture . Hitherto it has grown out of the life of the aristocrat. In future it may be expected to grow out of the secure and not-so-struggling life of whatever citizens are personally able to develop it. There need be no attempt to drag culture down to the level of crude minds. That, indeed, be something to fight tooth and nail! With artificially regulated, we may well let interests follow a natural course. Inherent differences in people and in tastes will create different social-cultural classes as in the past—although the relation of these classes to the holding of material resources will be less fixed than in the capitalistic age now closing. All this, of course, is directly contrary to Belknap's rampant Stalinism—but I'm telling you I'm no bolshevik! I am for the preservation of all values worth preserving—and for the maintenance of complete cultural continuity with the Western-European mainstream. Don't fancy that the dethronement of certain purely economic concepts means an abrupt break in that stream. Rather does it mean a return to art impulses typically aristocratic (that is, disinterested, leisurely, non-ulterior) rather than bourgeois.
    H. P. Lovecraft

Word of the Day

hyperentangled
Hyperentangled is a word that is not very commonly used, and as such, there are not many synonyms for it. However, some of the ways that the meaning of hyperentangled can be expres...