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.