[mikekchar]

I once taught English in a Japanese high school. Usually I taught a conversation class. The class was 55 minutes long and I had 43 students in the class. At one point I thought, I should speak to each student in the class every day.... and then I did the math. That's just over a minute to speak to each student even if I didn't do anything else in the class. Inequality is both normal and necessary most of the time. I can't give each student an equal amount of my attention and time every single class or else I will accomplish nothing of value.

You might say that if I had less students in my class, then I could give them each an equal amount of attention. However, when I had those situations I was even less likely to do so. Each one of my students was different. They had different needs, and different desires. Indeed, ideally I would give each of my students completely different and unequal attention according to their needs and desires.

However, the key is that each of my students should have equal access to my teaching. I do not need, nor want to treat my students equally, but I should give each access to everything I can do to help them within my constraints. And, at the very least, if I can only help a limited number of students meaningfully, each student should have an equal chance at that help.

I tend to agree with you that these labels of "bad" and "good" from a moral perspective are problematic. However, from the perspective of building a society, we need to discriminate between what is going to further our aims and what is not. It is a tricky thing.