1 Elisa Diaz Professor Leontaridis Anthropology of Inequality 04 December 2023 Addressing Inequality Inequality is a completely man made monster, made from interpretations and reactions to social and societal constructs. Categories that humans have created, such as race, gender, class, and sexuality, divide us overall as well as lead to people forming their own ideas and biases in regard to these categories. Over time, these categories that were created by us shifted to being full fledged systems, wherein inequality, privilege, and oppression lie. Institutions such as governments further these inequalities and make them a reality past the simple threshold of human opinion. Microaggressions and personal bias become systemic inequalities, with things such as wage gaps, gendered bathrooms, and police brutality occurring. Inequality has become something of an ouroboros, with personal bias influencing large scale systemic decisions, and then these government level policies becoming commonplace and having an impact on the mindset and values of the people. In her essay titled "Toward a New Vision", Patricia Hill Collins delves into the ways in which we often fail to recognize our behaviors and mindsets' contributions to oppression of others. Our own situations and instances of inequality are most pressing and at the forefront for us, and we as humans tend to be very individually focused. Because we are so focused on our own inequalities, we often fail to see that our actions also contribute to inequalities that others might face. People highlight the form of oppression with which they are most familiar and 2 present that as most important, leading them to not see the importance of other groups of people's oppression so much. There is an unintentional competition for who is most oppressed, with people almost competing for recognition and resources in a society that values all of them very little. We are given sets of ideas about those different from us from young, forming an implicit bias. Often, most of us aren't even aware of the ways in which we stereotype and perpetuate harmful ideas. There is always an aspect of "othering", even in those that advocate for social change. One thing that must be unlearned that perpetuates the inequality of others is microagressive thought and action. We almost all are guilty of it, and are just unaware. My uncle is guilty of it when he tells his queer child not to wear a pride flag out in June, I personally am guilty of it when I playfully tease my grandmother for her lack of knowledge in English. The only real way to improve this behavior and its subsequent effects is with awareness. Approaches to oppression and discourse surrounding oppression must be changed, with less emphasis on the self and more on oppression as a whole. It is important to break down systems of oppression and how these things such as class, race, and gender seem to go together. Oppression of one of these categories often reinforces oppression of another, such as how many people of color are in more lower income neighborhoods. These categories of inequality become intrinsically linked and it is important to analyze this in order to attempt to dismantle the way that we as individuals contribute to it, as we are responsible in so many complex ways, we must approach our undoing of it with similar complexity and care. It's hard to figure out the best way for social change to be achieved. There are so many factors that this is dependent on, such as the willingness of people in power to want to put 3 forward policies in order to reduce inequalities and encourage social changes. The best ways for social change to be addressed have to include starting on a small scale, focusing on one pressing issue and then getting bigger, or focusing on one area before increasing the scope. I personally think it would be easiest for wealth inequalities to be addressed first, as this is related to so many other forms of oppression such as health and education. These are practical, systemic issues that need to be addressed before fully taking on something much larger in the library of human creation, like race and gender. We can more easily undo our world's money centric mindset than we can the biases of every individual in the world. In Thomas Piketty's interview with the Harvard Gazette, there are two different methods he suggests as ways to achieve social change as well as address inequality. These ways are social federalism and participatory socialism. Social federalism is an interesting concept that focuses on globalization, which is vital in its own right to social change. Organizing globalization more socially is something that I agree with, it cannot just be about free trade, we must also focus on more social issues. I especially agree with this way's focus on sustainable development goals. However, this is not the method I would personally prefer. While I agree with the sentiments of this method more, it feels less achievable to get people, especially rich people in charge of nations, to agree on a global level rather than a national level. This way functions under the assumption that every government operates with the goal of reducing inequalities and exacting social change, and while this is how it should be, it is simply not reality. Because of this, social federalism makes less sense as a focus. It may be something to tackle later on, but focusing on our country's inequalities nationally is an important start before globalization is on the table. I personally believe that participatory socialism makes the most sense. This is a very good method to assure that inequality, especially in regard to wealth and access to higher 4 education, is lessened. A focus on education and making higher education more accessible is very important to closing many gaps. While it directly helps with wealth and education gaps, this sort of ability to gain a higher education also helps educate people who may become more informed and proactive in addressing other inequities. Also, taxing the rich and using that for individuals under the age of 25 is a fantastic idea, it holds the rich accountable for their finances while also setting younger generations up for future success. The more people that are taken care of, the less prevalent inequality becomes in our society. The two authors discussed in this essay approach inequality from different scopes. Collins' approach is more humanistic, focused on the person and their thoughts, actions, and experiences. One point made that exemplifies this perfectly is when she asks the reader to list traits that they identify as more masculine and traits they identify as more feminine. This argument is dependent on the reader's own internal ideas and biases. What's most important to her essay is the individual and their effect on other individuals. It's a smaller scale in size, but very large in terms of impact. Piketty's interview, on the other hand, is very much about the big picture and tackling inequalities as a whole, on a governmental level. This is exemplified when he talks about right-wing populism. Piketty never centers the individual, or singular conscious thought, he simply speaks about people in relation to political parties and their contributions to inequality as a whole, not as one. These are both very important and go hand in hand, as you can't make the big changes without assessing internal bias first. Overall, I believe that there is a lot that can be done regarding inequality, but you can't start at the largest level and expect change. For the majority to agree, individuals first have to be able to self reflect and discuss with their communities. I believe that social change starts with yourself, then moves to your community, your state, your country, and one day, the world. The 5 most important thing will always be being aware of one's own actions and the consequences of that, and working to undo or prevent any harm that may be caused. One pebble thrown in the sea can cause a wave; the little things are just as important as the big things. Bibliography Hill Collins, P. Toward a New Vision, Race, Class and Gender as Categories of Analysis and Connection (p.485-494) Pazzanese, Christina. Interview with Thomas Piketty: How political ideas keep economic inequality going. Mississippi Review, The Harvard Gazette, 2020.
