Who are we?

Egality is a transnational network of activists with a core vision: a world where everyone has an equal say in the decisions that affect them.

What do we believe?

We believe that to solve global problems we need global democracy. We believe that society's inability to effectively tackle problems in areas such as climate change, poverty and war is related to one fundamental problem: a lack of real democracy.

Democracy that exists only within national borders is not real democracy. Real democracy involves everyone affected making decisions together. For local issues that means your community. For global issues, that means everyone, everywhere having an equal say.

We believe that all people are equal, regardless of where they are born. Discrimination based on the colour of your passport is no different to that based on the colour of your skin or your gender. And we believe the real barriers to remaking our world are in our own heads. They are psychological, not logistical.

Who do we target?

You. Us. Society. Our collective mindset that makes unnecessary assumptions about how the world ought to be run.

How?

Actions. Stunts. Campaigns. Anything that will provoke people to think and act differently.

What do we want?

A world where we all have an equal say in the issues that affect us.

Who funds us?

We're all self-funded volunteers who give our free time to these projects. Obviously sometimes we have costs that we cannot pay for so we fundraise through benefit events and ask kind supporters to donate!

I'm in. What do I do now?

There are several ways you can get involved!

Why global democracy?

Without global democracy, we have no effective way of tackling Climate change, migration, poverty and war.

Climate Change - Carbon emissions don’t stop at borders so why should accountability?

Those least responsible for climate change are paying the highest price. Rising sea levels in Bangladesh are already creating climate refugees. Lower rainfall in Ghana is causing extreme poverty through reduced crop yields. High-polluting countries are causing these problems yet there is no way for those affected to hold them to account.

Pleading with rich country politicians to do more is simply not enough. It is demeaning and accepts their right to decide for everyone else. As long as we keep pandering to this system we are reinforcing it.

The UN climate negotiations are a farce: it's the big polluters who decide. The so-called G2 (the governments of China and the US) have dominated the discussion, but why is it that these governments get the final say? 75% of the planet's people don't even live in those countries. Instead of the G2, it should be the G7billion making those decisions. Until those affected by climate change have equal say as the big polluters, we will not have a chance of stopping climate change. In the words of Pablo Solon, the Bolivian UN ambassador, “only the exercise of global democracy could prevent a climate catastrophe.”

Migration - don't judge me by the colour of my passport

People from rich countries have more freedom of movement than citizens of poor countries.

This is discrimination, in the same category as racism and apartheid.

Every year millions of people migrate around the world for reasons ranging from persecution to tourism.

If we are to have any migration controls, they should be decided by everyone, not imposed selectively by governments of rich countries on others.

Poverty - the hand that giveth and the hand that taketh away

However you look at it, there is no way to see our present situation as just. A child dies every six seconds because of hunger, even though we have enough food for everyone.
In the last century, the biggest steps taken against extreme poverty within countries have been enabled through political change. Giving equal political voice to rich and poor has opened the door to redistribution of resources in the form of health-care, education and housing with lasting benefits for all.

Expecting the massive global inequality to be redressed through aid is naive and patronising. People don’t want charity, they want justice.

It shouldn't be for rich countries to decide how much aid to give, who to give it to, and what conditions to attach to it. Those affected by poverty know best what they need. If we really want to combat poverty we need to ditch the donor-recipient model. People want empowerment through political equality. Only then will we be able to come up with just and sustainable solutions.

War - if the people got to decide what would happen to war?

Today, five of the world's biggest arms traders - China, France, Russia, UK and US - decide when war is "legal". As permanent members of the UN Security Council they have a veto over any resolution. Relying on the UN Security Council as the world's arbitrator of peace in this context is plain mad.

The Iraq war, widely seen as lacking a UN resolution and legal backing, was defended by the UK Attorney General on the basis that a previous UN resolution was still valid.
These five countries were the main victors of the Second World War, but why does that mean that they could make decisions on behalf of all of humanity 70 years later? Who do these five countries' politicians represent? How did they come be seen as the world's representatives?

If we want to have a fair basis for deciding on the legality of war it has to include everyone affected. We cannot accept a system that judges based on the interest of a few. Partial justice is not real justice.