Liberals will argue against socialists and socialism that they support equality of opportunity,

not equality of outcome.

Now I've always found this argument amusing and quite ironic for a few reasons.

One, nothing about socialism requires a perfect equality of outcome.

In fact, even the idea of a perfect equality of outcome is incoherent.

What would it even mean in practice?

Where in all of socialist theory and history is this idea of equality of outcome promoted?

Well, it's not.

It's simply made up by anti-communist who've never bothered reading up on the thing they

are so fervently against.

Two, liberalism has never, in all of its history, been able to produce anything even approaching

equality of opportunity anywhere in the world ever.

In fact, if anyone were to lay out a set of policies that actually brought about equality

of opportunity, that person would be labeled a communist extremist by the very liberals

who claim to support equality of opportunity.

Three, ironically, it is not liberalism, but only socialism that could ever actually

attempt to provide real equality of opportunity.

And it would be precisely in their rejection of liberalism and capitalism that socialists

could open up a path to make this much-flanted liberal platitude a really existing social

reality.

And it is only communism, the final destination of socialism, that could solidify such equality

and perpetuity.

...