Error of Definition

I'm beginning to suspect an error of definition. And perhaps it is a product of social conditioning.

Where justice is promoted as being equal, rather than the natural law of equity: The species that tries; survives.

Perhaps it is just me; perhaps that's the fundamental difference between the two major political groups as well. One see's fairness as equal shares none deserving more than any other; Their opponents see the system should reward those who labor, and rewards be portioned out according to effort invested. Both have their strengths, both have their blindness.

What I perceive most is the absence of acuity. That being, clarity into how to re-establish homeostasis beyond a zero sum gain. Rather than value respect, consideration, empathy and the benefit of mutuality, it has become a king of the hill struggle.  Selecting who is to loose in order for another to be the benefactor is just a round of Russian roulette. It will only end in tears.

Why are the self-interested motives of powerful companies being elevated to a philosophical principle? Did that hatch with the Supreme Court ruling a corporation is an entity with the same rights and privileges as private citizens?