Impact of Inequality on Democracy

Impact of diversity on DemocracyYannick BuitenhuisInhoudIntroductionInequalityrg as a causeLimiting country.ConclusionIntroductionInequality is as old as mankind itself. Think of the difference amid the Pharaoh versus the tomb builders the Caesar versus the proletariat the King and his nobles versus the peasants The factory owners versus the labourers and at the moment, between business(wo)men, CEOs and (investments) bankers versus lower-income jobs. There has always been some sort of divergence. But how does this unlikeness between raft emerge in the partnership of our modern history and how will it bristle in the future?Capital in the Twenty-first Century by Thomas Piketty, both being praised as being criticised, focuses on this subject of emergence discrimination between people in our bran-newest coke and depicts the origin of this inequality since the beginning of the industrial Revolution. Piketty looks at the outcomes of the modern economical system and attempts to answer antithetic researchs considering this and the global dynamics of the distribution of income and wealth on the basis of historical and comparative data, and a theoretical framework (The Economist, 2014 Piketty, 2014, p. 8). Pikettys outcomes resulted in the following questionWhy does inequality fire and how whoremaster it affect state during the beginning of the twenty-first century?First of all, inequality is contended and a personal opinion on the subject is given. Subsequently, this paper discussed the work of Piketty on the basis of the installation of his book. And as last, the relationship between the outcomes of Pikettys work and the future of democracy is discussed. This all resulted in a conclusion, which links back to the central question.InequalityAs menti one(a)d earlier, inequality is not new in our humans, and it will not fully disappear. A world without inequality is a utopian view. Inequality can only increase or decrease, but if it commences centrifu gal in one direction, then it becomes a line and the cause of others. Inequality does not only have an economical dimension, and inequality in these different dimensions can go impart in hand. Economic inequality can for instance lead to other forms of inequality, like social inequality, inequality in opportunity or health. Furtherto a greater extent, it can come hand in hand with psychological effects (Judge Paterson, 2001, p.6 Scanlon, 2014 Wilkinson, 2011).Other factors that come into play with inequality are the power relations between different actors (Flint Taylor, 2011, pp. 28-32, 40-41). Scanlon (2014) competes that wealthy people in a lodge where wealth is unequally distributed often end up in control of many aspects of the lives of poorer people. He gives an example of how ownership of a public media mercantile establishment can give control over the view of people about themselves, others and society. In the words of Jean Daudrillard, a hyperreality can be created in which one can create an image of the reality for others (Valkenberg, 2012, p. 53). But this can also be applied to the creation of opportunity. Thus, inequality can give some people an undesirable degree of control over others.Inequality is already something in itself, but it makes a difference if this inequality is justified or not. But how and when do you qualify inequality as justified? And where do you draw the boundary between justified or unjustified? This does not have to discourage. Wilkinson (2011) reasons that our mutual inequality and in which interrelation we stand against each other are key factors determining the average wellbeing of societies. So, to strive for less inequality in our society is a noble goal. But how and why does this inequality begins? To find an answer the work of Piketty will be consulted.rg as a causePiketty takes a new path with his work concerning economics and the question about unequal wealth distribution among people in societies and its e volution over the long term since the ordinal century. He uses a clear and logical way of reasoning which is based on a large database, clarified in his introduction. This section will discuss Pikettys work. The discussion will focus around his findings, and mainly on his idea of rg. A remark must be made the discussion limits itself to the introduction of the book, so not his whole work will be discussed.Piketty (2014, pp. 9-12) looks at a longer eon span and different time periods to find developments in history. Thereby, he finds some vital insight in two principles of David Ricardo and Karl Marx to understand the twenty-first century. This insight contributes to the acknowledgement of two types of forces, those of convergence and those of divergence. The forces of convergence can become overwhelmed by forces of divergence, pushing towards greater inequality. The most destabilizing forces of divergence are the ones related with the process of accumulation and concentration of w ealth when growth (g) is weak and the return on capital (r) high. Piketty formulates this in a short formula which makes the situation synoptic rg. A situation where risk of divergence is high, because inherited wealth will grow faster than output and income and the concentration of capital can reach extremely high levels (Piketty, 2014, pp. 20-23).This all leads to greater inequality, which can reach levels incompatible with the meritocratic determine and principles of social justice fundamental to modern democratic societies (Piketty, 2014, p. 23) contradicting the work of Simon Kuznets and his Kuznets curve, an idea that has long dominated economists (Piketty, 2014, pp. 12-15).Limiting democracyPreviously addressed by Piketty was that inequality can reach levels incompatible with our democracy. But Piketty does not give attention to this relation in his introduction. In this part, the relation between Pikettys outcomes and the future of democracy will be discussed. How can onto genesis inequality affect democracy?In my opinion, democracy can certainly be affected by growing inequality between people. First, when too much inequality arises can mean that lot of social-economic conflict will stay in the social order. This will be politically expressed in a continuous struggle to eradicate the felt political deficit. Democracy in a fast changing society asks for continuous energy to keep democracy with the current demands. This cannot be reached, because the conflicts are constantly demanding time to be removed.Secondly, in relation with the first point, growing inequality, its social-economic conflicts and the felt political deficit can result in discontent, sledding of faith and disillusionment under (a growing group of) people (Caryl, 2014). Democracy cannot fully give out without a majority supporting it and its policies. A demand of change will be dominate the public opinion. In a certain way it can be seen as a pendulum, it cannot keep going in one di rection, at a certain point it needs to swing back.Thus, in my eyes, democracy cannot work in its optima forma during a time of growing inequality.ConclusionFirst of all, inequality is not new, but its level can change over time because of forces of convergence and divergence. It is not limited to one dimension and these dimensions of inequality can sometimes go hand in hand. A certain relation between inequality and power relations was also found, possibly resulting in uneven control.The question that was asked in the introduction was as followWhy does inequality grow and how can it affect democracy during the beginning of the twenty-first century?During the discussion of Pikettys work the cause of growing inequality during the beginning of the twenty-first century was found. Piketty showed with his idea of rg that in a time with slow growth and the return on capital high, inherited wealth grows faster than output and income, resulting in more inequality. So, rich people can get ev en more rich and faster than people with a lesser fortune.As last, democracy cannot work powerful when inequality keeps growing. First, because the social-economic conflicts resulting from inequality demand time to be remove, so less time can be spend on the current and changing demands of democracy. Secondly, discontent, loss of faith and disillusionment in the current democracy can prevail under people, resulting in less support and a demand for change.So, resulting from this, one could argue that when inequality in the twenty-first century keeps growing, the current democratic system comes to stand under pressure.ReferencesCaryl, C. (2014), Economist Debates Democracy are worries about the health of democracy today overblown?http//www.economist.com/debate/days/view/1055. Last used on 21 September 2014.Economist, The (2014), The Economist explains Thomas Pikettys Capital, summarised in four paragraphs.http//www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2014/05/economist-explains. L ast used on 18 September, 2014.Flint, C. Taylor, P. (2011), Political Geography World-Economy, Nation-State and Locality. Harlow Pearson Education Limited. Sixth Edition. pp. 28-44.Judge, K. Paterson, I. (2001), Poverty, Income Inequality and Health. Treasury Working Paper Series 1 (29), pp. 1-64.Leeds Gate (2013), Climbing the social ladder how about even being on the ladder? http//www.leedsgate.co.uk/2013/11/18/climbing-the-social-ladder-how-about-even-being-on-the-ladder/. Last used on 18 September, 2014.Piketty, T. (2014), Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Cambridge The Belknap Press of the Harvard University. pp. 8-22.Scanlon, T.M. (2014), The 4 Biggest Reasons Why Inequality is Bad for Society. http//ideas.ted.com/2014/06/03/the-4-biggest-reasons-why-inequality-is-bad-for-society/. Last used on 21 September 2014.Valkenberg, S. (2012), De 20 Beste Ideen van de Filosofie. Filosofie Magazine 20(7-8), pp. 27-57.Wilkinson, R. (2011), How Economic Inequality Harms Societies. h ttps//www.ted.com/talks/richard_wilkinson. Last used on 21 September 2014.1