Equality ?

[Spasiba]

I think a common held belief here is that people should be equal, and now I'm doing they annoyingly Socratic thing, and asking what we mean by 'equality'? Do we mean in all ways possible, women, men, races, etc all participating side by side in all jobs, in the community, in activities? That seems more or less a certainty, but what about those with less than average mental capacity (and I don't just mean conservatives), physical ability, and such? How in that case, do we judge if they are capable for a given activity.
And now I go to Plato's 'Republic,' where he raised some interesting thoughts. The general thought here is probably that we all are equal in voice, but the other ways I mentioned before come to mind: physical ability, knowledge, etc, surely there are people more 'fit' for certain jobs. Can education and practice bring anyone, then, up to par for the job they wish to fulfill? Plato talked of how the masses were generally, well, stupid, and shouldn't have much voice in government- I think that if we get education for everyone, that should rule out most of that kind of problem. I hate the thought of people not having a voice. Plato said that, because of that, philosophers, who have had years of experience in many fields, will rule, and because of their past and their philosophic grandeur, will rule benevolently. That sounds nice, but just seems to be a guy saying "I'm fit for power, you're not." He also talked of these rulers then spreading out lies so that the people will stay in check, and that was the last straw for me, but the question remains, if people are smart enough to rule themselves. I hope education would fulfill that need, what about you?

On a side note, this 'Republic' Plato speaks of seems anything but what I knew of it, and raises an eyebrow, as our government loves the idea of republic (and democracy, apparently, which in this case wouldn't work) and it's got me thinking that they should love this idea, it gives them power "I'm a big time, rich politician, let me solve your problems for you" and they create lies to keep us under control. That follows, in a way, Plato's Republic, but something less than ideal. Just kind of interesting, I thought.

[BobKKKindle$]

I just want to make a few comments; Many people are not interested in politics, not because they are incapable of understanding political issues, but because they recognize that existing institutions, although described as democratic and promoted as the ideal system of government, do not give people full control of every aspect of their lives, for example, how they workplaces are organized, and the rich are able to influence delegates, who are supposed to reflect the interests of the electorate. The development of socialist democracy, in addition to education, would make people more able and more willing to express their views and participate in bodies of discussion.

If someone is suited to leadership, or it is not realistic to consult the community on every single issue of contention, then a system of socialist representative democracy can be used whereby a delegate is elected for a term of office. This system would differ from the parliamentary system that currently exists in several countries such as the United Kingdom, as delegates would be subject to recall at all times so they can be replaced if it is felt they are not fully representing their interests of their community, and delegates would be accorded no special benefits such as a higher wage.

[Spasiba]

Now assuming there is still discrimination, what can be done to make sure that people do have equal opportunities?
And I do hope that in our progressive society we will see people more interested in politics, and we'd better be able to keep that way to prevent sliding backwards (another discussion).
So back to the question, will everyone be equal in every way? And on being capable of leadership, would anyone be able to run, and what will a campaign look like?