The essential nature of love is its enourmous inequality; we do not love all equally  It is mankind's greatest driving gradient.

The invocation to love all equally is a demand to love no one; to not love.

Gradients drive everything.   A world without gradient is flat on its back.

Stasis in this universe is death.   Even homeo-stasis is a balance of gradients, not a lack of gradient.

Gradient: the rate of change of something with respect to something else.   Often, but not always, with respect to time and space.

Identity itself demands gradient:  the rate of change of 'you' with respect to time and place.   Without that gradient, there is no 'you' unless one of the following were true: you existed everywhere and for all time equally everywhwere and always.   IOW, you are either everythign or nothing.  Only in those two instances is gradient(you)=0.   Neither is true, and so, 'you' as you depend on gradient for you very identity.    If you exist in this universem and are not this Univese, then gradient(you) = finite and not 0.

Without gradient, not only is identity not possible, but in our case, without meaning.   In universal equality world, there is no identity; identity itself requires inequality.

There is certainly no natural argument or analog which would lead us to seek equality in all things, as itself -- equality -- being a value.

Equality in opportunity?   Equality under the law?   Equality as peers on the commons?   No problem.  Great and selective application of the term 'equality.'

Equality in all things?  Hardly.

Equaility of outcomes, every race imaginable a 7 billion way tie?   Not that much coercive force in the world, unless we are all coming in last, then indeed, launch the missiles.

Fortunately there is not just 'the' race.    There is a gradient of races with respective to time and space.   It is not a problem in the least that we did not all equally compete in the men's downhill at Sochi last month.

regards,

Fred