Inequality Kills
June 28th, 2009 by SocProf and tagged Globalization, Goran Therborn, Health, Health Care, Poverty, Public Policy, Social Exclusion, Social Inequalities, Social Privileges, Social Stratification, Sociology
It also produces a variety of other social problems, which I will explore in a longer post tomorrow. In the meantime, sociologist Goran Therborn distinguishes between three types of inequalities, all with deleterious effects (hat tip to Mike Buhl for this):
And then goes on to list four ways in which societies become unequal:
Which of these factors matter the most vary historically, geographically and culturally. And each "inequalization" process has the capacity to increase certain types of inequalities more than others. This also means that it possible to reduce different types of inequalities by reducing the impact of these four factors.
Therborn shows that all three types of inequalities, as produced by the processes listed above, can kill people in different ways in the sense that they lower life expectancy and have damaging effects on health. Even the most "immaterial" form of inequality, existential inequality, has a negative impact on health through stress and a range of negative health effects. Hierarchies are lethatl, even in rich countries.
Moreover, countries that are more equal enjoy all sorts of rewards in terms of low levels of social problems and dysfunctions across the board, and not just for the poor. When a society is more equal, everybody benefits. And the opposite is true in more unequal societies.
And this is why we should care about inequalities rather than treat them the result of some sort competitive human nature and evolutionary pressure.
So, reducing social inequalities is not just better for individuals. It is better for society (at the national or global level):
So what should be done? Therborn suggests two approaches:
This one is a tough nut to crack in a country like the US where the perception is that the wealthy have all earned their wealth and they drive economic growth and the poor are there because of their own individual failing or inadequate values (a mix of Weberian Protestant ethic and culture of poverty with a dash of social darwinism) and that inequalities are the representation of individuals’ respective merit and political discourse is rife with reference to "hard-working middle class families" (never mind that families cannot, by definition be hard-working). Any notion that policies should be implemented to reduce inequalities is perceived as going against nature, giving handouts to the undeserving by taking away from those who have earned their money.
It is an uphill battle to demonstrate that inequalities are the product of social mechanisms, not individual failings, that it may seem satisfying to perceive those below oneself on the social ladder as deserving of their fate but that a look at the data proves that everybody loses when inequalities are high. Finally, that more equal societies are more humane societies… let anyone try to argue against that one.
Posted in Globalization, Health, Health Care, Poverty, Public Policy, Social Exclusion, Social Inequalities, Social Privilege, Social Stratification, Sociology | No Comments »
