SUMMARY - Brief History of Equality, A - Thomas Piketty

Play this article



Here is a summary of the key points:

  • Wealth inequality remains very high, with the top 10% owning over half of total wealth in France and the bottom 50% owning just 5%.

  • There has been a gradual deconcentration of wealth over the past century as the share held by the richest 1% declined from over 50% to around 25% today.

  • This deconcentration primarily benefited the middle 40% rather than the poorest 50%, so it was an unequal deconcentration.

  • The composition of property has evolved, with housing gaining prominence and financial assets increasing among the wealthiest.

  • Formal legal rights have become more equal, for instance between husbands and wives, workers and employers, tenants and landlords.

  • Overall, there is a long-term trend toward greater equality, but it is limited and gradual. Wealth at the top remains highly concentrated and there are still major disparities between social classes.

    Here is a summary of the key points:

  • In the late 18th and early 19th centuries, there were successful slave rebellions in Haiti and other colonies that threatened the system of slavery.

  • In response, slaveholders started to view abolition as inevitable and shifted their focus to obtaining financial compensation for the loss of their "property" (enslaved people).

  • When slavery was abolished in the British Empire in 1833, the Slavery Abolition Act provided compensation to slave owners across the British colonies. The freed slaves received nothing.

  • Similarly, when France abolished slavery in 1848, the new republic compensated slave owners for their loss of "property." Again, the freed slaves got nothing.

  • The amounts paid to slaveholders were significant. Britain borrowed £20 million in 1835 (worth over £2 billion today) to pay its slave owners.

  • Paying compensation to slave owners effectively made abolition more palatable to slaveholder interests, helping ensure peaceful transitions. However, it also perpetuated injustice by rewarding oppressors.

  • The history illustrates how providing financial reparations and restitution to victimized groups, rather than their oppressors, is vital for promoting true justice during political transitions.

    Here is a summary of the key points:

  • Slavery was a central part of the early United States economy and society. Many Founding Fathers owned slaves, even as they espoused ideals of liberty.

  • The North and South developed divergent economic models, leading to tensions over the expansion of slavery that culminated in the Civil War. Slaves were promised compensation that never materialized after the war.

  • Debates over reparations for slavery continue today. Other countries like France and Britain compensated slave owners when abolishing slavery, but not slaves.

  • Post-slavery colonial societies instituted systematic inequality between Europeans and natives through legal, educational, and economic policies. Overcoming this legacy requires acknowledging its importance.

  • The French Revolution proclaimed legal equality but did not achieve substantive equality. Privileges based on gender, race, and class persisted long after 1789.

  • The expansion of voting rights was a major struggle over centuries, as elites resisted expanding the franchise. Sweden had an extremely unequal voting system until the 1920s.

  • Contemporary capitalist democracies still struggle to achieve political and economic equality, as private wealth translates into political influence. Alternatives like co-determination in Germany provide some balance.

    Here is a summary of the key points:

  • The welfare state and progressive taxation helped reduce inequality in the 20th century, but have been weakened since the 1980s.

  • Revitalizing them seems like a natural path forward, but we must understand their limitations and the factors that have undermined them.

  • Their rise was driven by social and political struggles, which have faded in recent decades along with union power.

  • Globalization and tax competition between nations have made capital more mobile and constrained progressive taxation.

  • The welfare state also faces sustainability issues with aging populations putting pressure on pensions and healthcare.

  • While social welfare and fiscal progressivity remain powerful levers, new approaches and institutions may be needed to adapt them to 21st century conditions.

  • Ultimately, reducing inequality requires mobilizing political support and addressing both pre-tax inequality as well as post-tax redistribution. A multi-pronged strategy is necessary.

  • But the 20th century fiscal and social innovations remain essential starting points. Updating them for current challenges through democratic deliberation and participation is the most promising way forward.

    Here is a summary of the key points:

  • There has been major progress in reducing legal racial discrimination through civil rights laws, but large socioeconomic disparities persist along racial lines.

  • Affirmative action policies like quotas seek to accelerate parity by actively considering race in hiring and admissions. This remains controversial.

  • There are reasonable arguments on both sides - affirmative action aims to correct systemic biases but may not treat individuals fairly. There are also risks of reinforcing racial divides.

  • Alternative approaches like class-based affirmative action are worth considering. Ultimately policies should seek to address root causes of inequality through reforms like equitable school funding.

  • While legal protections are vital, reducing systemic racial inequality requires challenging prejudices, expanding economic opportunity, and building an inclusive society where diversity is valued. There are no easy solutions but continued effort is needed.

    Here is a summary of the key points on transnational assemblies and federal-social projects:

  • Transnational assemblies can provide democratic oversight over projects spanning multiple countries, through deputies from national parliaments or directly elected representatives. This helps address the democratic deficit in global governance.

  • However, transnational assemblies currently face challenges like national vetoes and lack of fiscal powers. New treaties could grant them more authority. The goal is to move beyond just national institutions.

  • Federal-social projects aim to combine federalism with explicit social objectives, not just capital mobility. This could involve new forms of fiscal and budgetary federalism enabling greater redistribution.

  • Taxing the wealthy requires improved financial transparency through regional or global registries of assets and incomes. Wealth taxes at a low transnational rate could fund global public goods.

  • More ambitiously, a global social protection fund could provide universal basic income, funded by global corporate taxes and wealth taxes. This advances social rights and solidarity at the global level.

  • Overall, federal-social projects would subordinate globalization to social objectives rather than the reverse. They require patient treaty negotiations to build transnational democratic authority. The goal is balancing national and global governance for the common good.

    Here is a summary of the key points about the gilets jaunes (yellow vests) movement in France:

  • Originated in late 2018 as a protest against fuel tax hikes and high cost of living, with protesters wearing the yellow safety vests required in all French vehicles.

  • Quickly grew into a larger movement against President Emmanuel Macron's policies and wealth inequality. Protesters viewed Macron as favoring the urban elite over rural and working class.

  • Protests occurred every weekend, with roads blocked and sometimes violence erupting in Paris and other cities.

  • The movement commanded wide public support initially but gradually lost momentum due to violence and lack of centralized leadership or demands.

  • Macron made some concessions like canceling fuel tax hikes, reducing taxes on pensions, and raising minimum wage. But protests continued for months.

  • The unrest put pressure on Macron and revealed deep dissatisfaction with his centrist, pro-business agenda among struggling parts of society.

  • Legacy shows the potential for rapid mobilization around economic inequality concerns. But the movement's diffuse, grassroots nature also limited its lasting policy impact.

    Here is a summary of the key points:

  • Macron's policies favored the rich and hurt the working and middle classes, leading to major protests and riots throughout France in late 2018 and 2019.

  • The yellow vest protest movement opposed inequality and the cost of living under Macron. It demanded economic reforms to increase wages, pensions, and welfare benefits.

  • The protests often turned violent, with clashes between demonstrators and police. In response, Macron suspended a fuel tax hike and announced measures to aid low-income groups.

  • However, protests continued as the yellow vests wanted more progressive taxation and policies to reduce wealth inequality. The movement reflected public frustration with Macron's agenda.

  • While the protests declined, they had a significant impact. They forced Macron to adjust his reform program and increased pressure for economic justice measures.

  • The yellow vest movement embodied a populist backlash against Macron's policies seen as favoring the elite over ordinary people. It highlighted demands for reducing inequality in France.

Did you find this article valuable?

Support Literary Insights by becoming a sponsor. Any amount is appreciated!