From a sociological point of view, income inequality means polarization. The gap between rich and poor represents a major rift in societal cohesion; it means a society divided against itself, essentially in two antagonistic camps with radically different priorities, plans, and objectives; indeed, with very different sets of values. And these two camps are engaged in an ongoing struggle with each other. Obviously, that is not healthy for any nation.
When you do not understand the economic system that creates this polarization (and ignorance of economics is something imposed on us with an almost religious insistence), you will find other ways to explain the divide. Instead of recognizing that we are talking about those who benefit from the system and those who are victimized by it, you will say that the gap is caused by the characteristics of those on each side of it. In other words, for example, you may say, “the rich are smarter and work harder; and the poor are stupid and lazy”; or perhaps you will explain the divide along racial or ethnic lines; or you will point to a plethora of other issues to explain why things are the way they are. This, then, creates a kind of cascading polarization; multiplying divisions in society, spreading animosities, with blame being thrown on all sides.
But, of course, the problem is with the system itself.
Capitalism has an untreatable bug in its system that creates crises on an ongoing, cyclical basis. If you were to say at any time “the economy is on the verge of collapse”, no matter when you said it, and no matter what conditions are prevailing at the moment, you would be right. Capitalist economies are always on the verge of collapse. All mainstream economists know this; they just use different words to say it.
There is no discussion of whether a crisis will occur; there is only debate about how to handle crises when they occur. And that debate is basically limited to two options: Either state intervention in the economy, or state withdrawal from the economy. But, you see, both options are not intended to close the rift in society; they are intended to preserve the system which causes the rift; they are intended to sustain the polarization.
In the United States, 10% of the population owns 75% of the country’s total wealth. Income inequality in America is even greater than it is in India. And this reflects the global trend in economic polarization. Logic will tell you that this cannot continue. But one thing is clear; the beneficiaries of the system are not going to be the ones to initiate change. However, as long as we, the majority, do not understand that the economic system itself is the cause of this polarization, we will attribute it to other causes, and this sets of a spiral of multiplying polarizations which keep us divided against each other and incapable of organizing cohesively to dismantle the system .
(Excerpted from the upcoming book “1,200 Crescent Moons”)
#1200_Crescent_Moons
#ألف_ومائتا_هلال
مقطع من كتاب “ألف ومائتا هلال” قريبًا بإذن الله.