In 2014, “inequality” was undeniably the buzzword in the public policy domain, partly thanks to Thomas Picketty’s unlikely bestseller, Capital in the 21st Century. Arguably, the Malaysian government did take notice of the issue in implementing certain policies of a redistributive nature, such as cash transfers via the BR1M programme.
However, to see inequality merely as “income inequality” avoids the larger question: what are the consequences of inequality? The discourse on inequality will not be complete, let alone constructive, if this dimension of the problem is ignored. While the word “inequality” itself invites moral judgment, the issue cannot be seen to be as simple as that.
Pigeonholing the problem as a moral argument will result in often intractable polemical ideological debates, forming the left, right and centre of Western politics as we know it. Not only that, in the overarching framework of neoliberal capitalism within which most democracies reside, denouncing inequality “just for the sake of it” would be cast off as “poor envy”. This is because the tenets of modern capitalism imply the inherence of inequality, as Picketty’s study that covers long-term inequality in the 20th century demonstrated.
neoliberal capitalism within which most democracies reside, denouncing inequality “just for the sake of it” would be cast off as “poor envy”. This is because the tenets of modern capitalism imply the inherence of inequality, as Picketty’s study that covers long-term inequality in the 20th century demonstrated.
