Is inequality inevitable?

My cultural anthropology teacher threw this at our class today and I wanted the opinions of a wider forum and I'm hoping some of you smarties will give me some discussion.

Do you think inequality is inevitable?

I took the unpopular side of No. To argue this correctly the actual word of inequality must be discussed. There will always be physical and perceptive inequality because everyone is different in there own sense. When I talk about inequality I'm referring to the value of my life(opinion, ideas, morals, etc) to anothers having equal importance.

Inequality is inevitable because we make it inevitable. There are the haves and the have nots. Those in power and those in poverty and the ones with the power aren't going to give it away. When man started living out of the realm of necessity he created inequality. Those who are truly equal, some indigenous peoples for instance are so because of what they value. Their society values food, shelter, each other, and this earth. We as a society value pieces of paper and shiny objects. The last thing on our minds is each other. When the first person to find gold plucked it out of the ground and said "hey i'll sell this to you" and the customer becomes dependant on the seller to supply with something that is of no importance to his personal existence. Men will kill each other for a shiny object that has no value in this existence except the one we give it. Someone in power saw gold and said, "I want that! a lot of it! and now!" and it became a symbol of power. However if a religous man saw it and declared it the "boogers of satan" it becomes a meaningless rock.

Then comes the problem of government and structuring society. The actual thought of leadership is creating inequality. Leadership is the basic human instinct to take control. In an indigenous society those who are most skilled assume natural leadership yet in our society when we squabble about trivial things instead of solving them we designate the power to someone who will.. often to justify his own means. In my mind this is how leadership is, a stupid idea and it is a human concept of control. Guidance is the only thing that can truly be offered and accepted without inequality but for someone to tell another what to do just because we as a society labeled him a "leader" is stupid.

So it has been my conclusion on behavior that for some reason in its in our nature to create classes because of our need of self approval which we must seek from others i.e. society. Therefore we create levels of existence and grandeur that are just mere allusions to our ignorance and stupidity.

thoughts?