Diversity demands fairness
On December 10, 1948, the United Nations Assembly approved the “Declaration of Universal Human Rights”, the text defines the fundamental rights for the social and legal equality of every person.
If the enunciation of the principles has opened our society to the acceptance of universal rights on equality, there are still prejudices against diversity.
In our life experience, we note that no two people are alike: the human race is characterized by a widespread social, cultural, economic, demographic, ethnic diversity, etc.
We are all different for something that characterizes us and at the same time we are an integral part of society as a whole: humanity is a set of diversity.
In the same way that each species in nature is functional to the others and to the balance of the whole, so should be the interdependence between individuals in which each contributes to human coexistence; but society is regulated by the imperfect laws of men often a source of injustice.
In equality, the same conditions are given to all without distinction, this criterion generates disparities in relation to the diversity of each one, an example of which is the poor appreciation of the Welfare State by citizens, who receive standardized services in the face of personalized requests.
Bringing back to the Lions world what has been expressed so far, I ask myself: what criteria should be followed in service to make it truly effective in diversity?
We are helped by the principle of fairness, which favors the recognition of what belongs to the beneficiaries on the basis of a humanitarian interpretation of the principle of equality, because there is nothing more unfair than to make equal shares among unequal ones.
In common thought, the concept of equity encounters an interpretative difficulty that an example will clarify better.
If I say that a certain distribution of rewards is fair, in the common sense I can mean three different situations: which have been divided into equal parts.
-that their distribution is proportional to the contribution given by each to obtain them.
-that the distribution took into account the different degree of need of the various subjects.
Of the three situations, only the third responds to the principle of fairness, which does not seek the literal application of the same or fair as in the first two cases, but distributes the action to the beneficiaries proportionally aiming at the best balance to real needs.
Acting with fairness requires an in-depth analysis of needs, to provide non-standard and generative solutions of true well-being.
Equity has the “modus pensandi” in ethics and the “modus operandi” in subsidiarity and they are inseparable from it: if ethics or subsidiarity are lacking, equity cannot be achieved.
When we operate in equity we must free ourselves from the market economy, we act in the sphere of self-giving, the purpose of which is to open, with reciprocity, a relationship between the parties; the priority is to bring everyone to a minimum degree of human dignity that generates social well-being and harmony in the community.
At the basis of the principle of fairness, therefore, there is a moral value and an indispensable principle in which Lions have always recognized themselves: the dignity of the person.
One of the meanings that the International President wants to put to our reflection by proposing the theme of diversity this year is the invitation to Lions to bring equity into the operational mosaic of service.