The conflict between liberty and equality seems to dominate contemporary political philosophy, but do we all understand this conflict only happens when you already have fairly high levels of both? If the lack of liberty means someone gets to give you orders, you are clearly not equal with that someone, so you cannot achieve meaningful equality through repressing liberty. Conversely, why a purely wealth/income inequality is compatible with liberty, there is a more fundamental sense of equal respect or consideration that is a prerequisite for liberty. Liberty means a rich man may want to build a really glorious skyscraper but if the poor man's shack is in the way and he is unwilling to sell it, then he cannot. This only happens if we think the property, and through that, the choices, the goals, the aims of the big and the small people are equally important. Throughout most of history, we had the kind of hierarchies where neither liberty nor equality was high. And they occasionally come back, and besides, most of the planet is not there either.

I don't really know what follows from it. Perhaps, that when taking a global view, opponents could cooperate. Those who want liberty should understand that in most cultures it comes through and with more equality, and those who want equality should understand that in most cultures it comes through and with more liberty.