Social Inequality

The increasing level of social inequality in the contemporary world is a source of concern within society. This is as a result of the widening gap between the rich and the poor in society to such an extent that the latter have ended up in situations where they cannot hope to improve their lives for the better. Also, the rich, in the process of seeking to attain even more wealth, have ended up forcing making use of those resources that could have been utilized for the purpose of alleviating poverty among individuals in society. Despite the presence of a welfare system, it is not robust enough to cater for the needs of the poor while at the same time helping them rise above poverty. This paper seeks to analyze the nature and causes of poverty as well as the theoretical frameworks that deal with the issue of inequality.

One of the biggest causes of social inequality is that the economy is controlled by the rich, who make use of the available natural resources to become richer. The rich few people in the world have taken over the most crucial means of production; essentially forcing the rest of society to work for them or buy products from them. The result has been that a significant number of those individuals who do not have any means of making a decent living have ended up in a situation where they have been reduced to poverty. The latter tend to have very few opportunities to advance themselves in society, meaning that they have to ensure that they do the best that they can to make ends meet with minimal support (Parish, 1988). The rich, on the other hand, often seek to increase their wealth, but this process often comes at a price because it encourages unequal development in society. There is little that the poor can do to protect their own interests because the rich have both the means and the power to ensure that they are able to attain considerable control over most of the wealth and resources within their own societies. As a result of the power that they derive from their wealth, the rich have the ability to ensure that they not only achieve dominance over the rest of society, but also advance their own interests in a way that is often against the interests of the poor.

The rich often seek to protect their interests through influencing government towards establishing favorable policies to them. The result is that a significant number of rich people in society end up being given access to numerous resources while at the same time not paying their fair share of taxes. This is a situation of concern because government ends up not having enough money that can be used in the establishment of a welfare program that is not only efficient, but also caters for the needs of the poor in diverse circumstances. Furthermore, as a result of the actions of the rich, it becomes extremely difficult for the poor to have the much needed opportunities to bring about their advancement in society. These individuals do not often have the educational qualifications to attain sustainable jobs in the current highly competitive economy; meaning that they have few opportunities to improve their lives. The unequal relationship between the rich and the poor in society can be explained through the Marxist theory, which proposes that society is divided into two distinct groups; the bourgeoisie, who control the means of production, and the proletariat, who provide the labor that the former need to ensure that they exploit the resources under their control. Thus, due to their need to not only maintain their power, but also increase their wealth, the bourgeoisie end up seeking to control even more resources; essentially ensuring that the proletariat remains subservient to them while still providing the labor that they need.

The Marxist perspective, therefore, proposes that social inequality comes about as a result of class struggle, or social conflict. The continuous struggle within the bourgeoisie, as well as the bourgeoisie against the proletariat and vice versa is essential in understanding social conflict because it promotes the idea that the different classes in society are often in conflict with each other. A consequence of this conflict is that a considerable number of individuals in society have ended up sinking into poverty while a very few have not only become rich, but have increased their wealth many times over. The resulting social inequality has created a potential for significant class conflict in the years to come, especially considering an increasing number of individuals have become poorer because of the social policies that have been established to protect the interests of the rich. The potential for conflict has become so great that it is possible that there will be an attempt, as Marx predicted, by the underprivileged classes in society to overthrow the rich in order to establish a just society. In most communities within the United States, specifically in large cities such as New York, the differences between the lifestyles of the rich and the poor can be seen through the manner that communities are separated. The rich live in exclusive neighborhoods that are not only secure, but also have all the amenities that they need. The poor, on the other hand, live in an insecure environment that is dominated by crime, low level of essential services, and high incidences of lack of basic needs; a sure sign of the inequality that has become dominant in society.

Additionally, the rise in inequality has led to a reduction in instances of social and economic justice. Social and economic justice is a situation where all individuals in society, no matter their class or status, are able to achieve a relatively high standard of living. Also, it involves individuals being able to ensure that they promote their own interests through having equal opportunities both within a social and economic context. Therefore, in the interest of advancing social and economic justice, the application of the Marxist theory is essential in creating equal opportunities. This perspective is one that promotes social equality where resources are owned by the entire community rather than by individuals. However, only essential property should remain in private hands, which individuals in society to have an equal share in the resources available while at the same time ensuring that individuals have equal opportunities for self development. The availability of equal opportunities would, however, involve taking away the significant power that capitalists hold over society. The nationalization of natural resources is an essential step in making sure that the state remains in the service of all people, without discrimination, rather than supporting the interests of a few people who form the elite. Moreover, in a society where all the people enjoy the available natural resources, social and economic justice can be achieved in a way that prevents the rise of class conflict.

In conclusion, the increase in the level of inequality in the contemporary world can be attributed to the way that a small number of individuals have come to gain control over a majority of the resources in society. Through this control, it has become possible to ensure that they continue further enriching themselves at the expense of both consumers and their workers. Therefore, in order to ensure that there is an end to inequality and the implementation of social and economic justice, it is essential for a Marxist-leaning type of society to be established.

Reference

Parish, R. (1988). Messages from a Welfare Mom. Newsweek.

Syrians horrified by 'crime of no honour' killing By Lina Shaikhouni and Chris Bell

A video documenting the brutal murder of a young woman in Syria has been met with outrage and horror online - and shone a renewed spotlight on so-called "honour killings" in the country.

The young woman, identified by Syrian news outlets and social media users as "Rasha Bseis", was shot repeatedly with an automatic rifle in the rebel-held town of Jarablus, near the Turkish border, by a man reported to be her brother. Some said the young woman was under 18 years of age.

The BBC has not been able to independently verify these reports.

In the video, a young woman cowers against a wall as a man stands over her with a gun. He opens fire, kicking dust up from the floor and wall. A voice in the background yells "wash away your shame".

The video has been widely viewed and shared online. A report on the Lebanese Al-Modon news website said police were investigating and an arrest warrant had been issued for the man.

'Crime of no honour'

Activists responded with a campaign to denounce so-called "honour" violence.

A graphic of the murdered woman looking fearfully into the camera, featuring the caption "crime of no honour", has been circulating online since Monday, BBC Monitoring reported.

Kish Malek (Check Mate), a civil society organisation based in southern Turkey, was among activist groups to publish the image on Facebook.

"A young man from the city of Jarablus has killed his sister after direct instigation by his friend allegedly to 'wash her of shame'," the organisation posted.

"The instigator filmed the crime and published it on social media networks," it added.

Sharing the image, Syrian NGO Women Now for Development issued a statement demanding justice for Rasha Bseis.

"Rasha is not only the victim of the spread of weapons and lapses in security, she is the victim of a dangerous social concept, under the pretext of 'shame washing' as an accepted - and sometimes encouraged - punishment," they wrote.

A copy of their statement would be sent to the local council governing Jarablus and all other concerned legal bodies, the organisation noted.

Syrian writer and women's rights activist Rima Flihan told the BBC there are no accurate statistics for honour killings in Syria but that "Syria and the Middle East had ranked highly in previous global statistics".

"I have worked in successive campaigns since 2005 in Syria to counter what is described as honour crimes," she said.

"The crime is encouraged by a law that is lenient on the murderer and a society which partly reduces a family's honour to a woman's body."

In 2009, Syria scrapped a law limiting or waiving punishment for men convicted of killing female relatives they regarded as having illicit sex.

At the time, Human Rights Watch said the measure did not go far enough. The law introduced a minimum two-year sentence for perpetrators of so-called "honour killings".

Since 2011, the conflict in Syria has claimed more than 350,000 lives. Ms Flihan says the chaos in Syria as a result of the war has made the problem of so-called "honour killings" worse.

"The presence of extremist groups in some areas encourages such crimes, and so does the law in others," she said.

"In both cases, the woman is the victim."

However, she told the BBC that the reaction to such crimes shows some positive change.

"I have noticed through monitoring people's comments on these crimes that there is a wider section of society that are rejecting and condemning them," she said.

Anna Dovgalyuk: Why do people think her 'manspreading' video is a Kremlin hoax?

Millions of people around the world have watched a viral video that appears to show a woman taking direct action against "manspreading". So why do some think it is actually Kremlin-backed disinformation?

A woman creeps up to unsuspecting men on the St Petersburg Metro. The men are taking up lots of space, with their legs wide open. Before they can react, the woman dumps a bottle of diluted bleach onto their trousers. It's enough to make a stain, although not strong enough to cause serious injury.

The video was made by Anna Dovgalyuk, a Russian activist, student and social media star. And it racked up millions of views before being removed from YouTube.

The story was picked up by numerous news websites and caused a huge online uproar. Comments heaped praise, scorn, and more extreme threats of violence on Anna and others involved with the video.

But along with the video's viral spread came questions. Was it staged? And also was it - as some believe - a crafted piece of propaganda, sponsored and spread by the Russian government? And if it was, what was the aim?

Anna Dovgalyuk is relatively new to YouTube activism. The video was only her second post on the platform. Her first also had a feminist theme, and was also shot on the St Petersburg Metro. It was a protest against upskirting - taking photos up women's skirts - and showed a model (not Anna) lifting her dress to show passengers her underwear.

That video also got a lot of coverage, and prompted Anna to turn her attention to a project attacking "manspreading" - the phenomenon of men on public transport who sit with their legs wide open or otherwise inconvenience fellow passengers by taking up too much space.

"I thought that it was one of those problems which should be highlighted, that people should be made aware of," she told BBC Trending.

The video went up in late September, and was clocking up views at a rate of a million a day. But almost immediately, questions were raised about its authenticity.

An online news outlet in St Petersburg called Bumaga quoted a man who supposedly appeared in her video, admitting that he was paid to sit on the train and get squirted. Bumaga reproduced a post by the man on the Russian social network Vkontakte. (His account was deleted and the BBC could not immediately reach the man for comment).

Additionally, in the video, Anna states that it was created "in assistance with friends who share my position."

Speaking to the BBC, she denied that it was staged or that anyone was paid to get diluted bleach thrown on them.

"This is some completely random guy," she says, "I don't know what kind of actor he considers himself to be... but there is no evidence, it's just somebody's claim."

'Staged Kremlin propaganda'

The story took another turn when a European Union project to combat Russian misinformation, EUvsDisinfo, called the video "staged Russian propaganda".

According to this theory, the stunt was part of the Kremlin's surreptitious online interventions into various culture wars around the world, and designed to provide evidence that Western-style feminism has gone too far.

The EUvsDisinfo report gave the video another burst of publicity - and several of the same outlets which credulously reported on the video when it went viral ran reports with the European Union's take.

EUvsDisinfo cited two main pieces of evidence: the Bumaga report, and also the fact that the video was picked up and repackaged by a Kremlin-funded social media venture called In The NOW, which has more than three million likes on Facebook. In The NOW also has accounts on Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat and YouTube.

But In The NOW began as a TV programme on Russia Today - now known as RT.

RT and the news agency Sputnik, are directly funded by the Kremlin. Western governments as well as media critics have called them propaganda outlets.

And EUvsDisinfo sees the dark arts of the Kremlin at work in Anna's video and its treatment by In the NOW. "The video stages extreme feminist activism and manages to provoke extreme anti-feminist reactions," its post on the video concluded. EUvsDisinfo turned down a request for an interview about this story.

But is this a case of seeing Russian bogeymen where there are none? Wouldn't any social media company pick up on such clickable content?

In The NOW - which is based in Berlin - says that although it is financed by Russian government money, it has editorial independence.

"There's no top-down editorial memo that goes out, nothing like that," says J Ray Sparks, an American who is chief operating officer of Maffick, the German company that produces In The NOW. "It has never been some kind of propaganda outlet."

Although In The NOW doesn't deny that it receives money from the Russian government, this information isn't readily apparent on its Facebook page. When asked whether its mix of light-hearted stories and more serious news had ever included a video critical of Russian President Vladimir Putin, Sparks replied: "We haven't done anything recently."

In the NOW's video about Anna's manspreading stunt has racked up more than six million views.