Is the World Becoming a More Equal Place? (Essay Sample)

Is the world becoming a more equal place?
by Name
Course Title and Code
Professor
University
City and State
Date
Is the world becoming a more equal place?
One of the major concerns of most governments worldwide is the need to attain equality. Inequality has become of the primary issues globally and a central issue in developing poor and rich countries. For this reason, reducing the gap between the poor and rich (individuals and nations) has been amongst the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) set to be attained by 2030. Despite resolving inequality being included in the strategic goals of many countries, sectors, organizations, and people, the plan still seems distant. The unequal nature of wealth and income cause economic instabilities, demeaning social cohesion, damaging the health of a population, developing a roadblock in adopting pro-environment behavior and strategies, and tearing the social fabric. Inequalities halt individuals, nations, and communities from progressing in life. Therefore, this paper analyzes the aspects depicting that the world is becoming a less equal or an unequal place gradually with time.
First, the continual acceleration of inequality in the world has been promoted by the increasing poverty rates across the globe. Poverty has been experienced throughout history and is a state of affairs for many countries and governments. Irrespective of the excellent organization of societies having advanced systems to rule, e.g., Rome and ancient China, the economies were technologically modest in productivity levels but have been considerably poor (Heywood 2014). For this reason, poverty has become a relative concept in global societies propagating inequality between individuals, communities, and countries. Despite poverty being connected to development, political and ideological controversies overwhelm the necessary strategies adopted to overcome it. As development is deeply engraved in economic liberalism, poverty is demonstrated through the lack of resources or income that help meet people's basic needs. There are opposing liberal, realist, and critical views that contend on development's impact on poverty levels globally. As a relative concept, comparing incomes between nations depicts that even in the wealthiest countries, a percentage of people suffer from poverty. At the same time, global comparisons show that a certain percentage of people considered poor in one country may be average middle-class income for another. For example, the poorest 10% in the UK have adequate funds compared to an average Portuguese person (Pearson, Foster and D’Ercole 2008). From this perspective, measuring poverty in terms of prevalent national living standards in relation to other individuals in other countries. Generally, there is a continual widespread of the poverty index worldwide because of different variables, which would differ significantly if compared from one society to another.
Additionally, inequality levels continue to increase due to the increased rate of globalization. After WWII, many countries shared a common essential economic vision, endorsing an open trade system for goods and services. This meant that capital would flow, corporations and people would move across borders, and encourage the fast spread of technology and data (Hu and Spence 2017). Trade expansion facilitated the improvement in living standards of people globally escaping poverty. However, the globalized perspective on economies has experienced counterarguments in recent years. There has been a widespread backlash on unrestricted cross-border movements as well as free trade of capital has increased over the years. Ideals of free-flowing information have significantly clashed with the ideologies of the right for privacy, intellectual property protection, and an increase in cybersecurity (Hu and Spence 2017). According to Heywood (2014), globalization critics link it to intensified subordination and polarization. This is because globalization has been portrayed as a game of 'loser' and 'winners' (Heywood 2017). It is believed to be a concept-t of benefitting others at the expense of other people. Besides, between-country inequalities have increased because of the global trading system's implicit tendencies through the principle of free trade. Free trade has faced several criticisms because it is presumed to favor the rich states' interests through the increment inaccessibility to markets of poor states without exposing themselves to the same vulnerable situations (Heywood 2014). Evidenced through the World Trade Organization (WTO), industrialized countries/states exert pressure on less-developed nations, encouraging other states to accept economic openness and other anomalies like continued protection of agriculture by the EU and the USA. Therefore, globalization propagates inequality between states globally as it favors the rich and benefits them more than the poor.
Besides poverty and globalization, global politics has influenced inequality worldwide. Cultural divide and wars have been projected to be significant instigators of inequality between societies globally in the new world. Heywood (2014) argues that war is a continuation of politics by various means. It is a means of forcing opponents into submissions to another's will (Heywood 2014). One of the ways war occurs is via ideological and cultural factors, portraying the international environment as unstable and threatening and providing political groups or states with expansionist or militaristic self-image. As a result, the shift in civilization has shifted global politics and wars as different states and societies have different self-interests to perpetuate dominance. Huntington (2000) believes that some nation-states want to remain powerful actors in global affairs as others are deprived of the same power, maintaining individual interests. He further states that the clash of civilizations dominates international politics as civilizations' fault lines draw battle lines for the future. Conflicting civilizations is the latest stage in the evolution of modern world conflicts (Huntington 2000). As civilizations' identity was the main factor that promoted the rise of the Cold War between Princes in the ancient world, Huntington believes it to be a catalyst towards fights between nations around the world in the future. This is because civilizations' identities are basic rather than only real. They are differentiated by tradition, language, history, Culture, and significantly religion. The eight major civilizations, i.e., Hindu, Japanese, Latin American, Islamic, Confucian, Western, African, and Slavic-Orthodox, have different cultures, separating them and showing the differences in views. Hence, the world is continually unequal because of these differences as each civilization wants to exert dominance on another.
Fourthly, recent years have viewed the move for human rights as a propagator to the increasingly unequal nature of societies globally. Naturally, human rights have significant implications for global politics. Despite being fundamental and universal, governments are enshrined to a powerful obligation to steer equal human rights, affecting domestic and foreign policies (Heywood 2014). As the previous paragraph argues, global politics is driven by wars arising from self-interest or cultural and civilization identity. This is because the boundaries of moral concern surpass the national borders disregarding these borders. As a result, significant debates have arisen over the years on the ideology that human rights try to parallel the two genders where a one-size-fits-all perspective is attained. The six guiding values of equality of genders, i.e., solidarity, freedom, tolerance, shared responsibility, respect for nature, and equality, seem to be compromised to ensure international development is attained (Cornwall and Rivas 2015). Critics argue that the nature of human rights gender perspective in developing its goals only took place among a few United Nations officials rather than those experiencing the implementation of gender equality ramifications. In support, Heywood (2014) agrees that human rights have been difficult to maintain because of conflicting situations from different countries. Notably, power politics among the Security Council's permanent members hinder the UN from clarifying matters on various factors. Therefore, the differences of values held by different countries on human rights show the imbalance experienced in the current world because the rights seem to be violated by various states instead of the initial intention of creating them.
Inequality is also depicted in the international development perspective. Over the years, significant changes have been witnessed in efforts to international development. A shift in development thinking, donor landscape, donor priorities around 'small' and 'big' development, and the dawn of choosing for developing nations and shifting relationships, aid creating significant autonomy for emerging economies (Harman and Williams 2014). Heywood argues that the need for developing or poorer countries to improve their development propelled a surge of these Nations borrowing from western financial institutions and other private institutions. Nonetheless, the increased interest rates and gradual decline in the global economy during the 1970s resulted in an economic stagnation across the developing countries leading to difficulties in debt servicing (Heywood 2014). Pressures of funding and enhancing development by developing countries stimulated inequalities because of the disadvantages posed by the national debt crises experienced by developing countries. Also, there has been a shift in donor prioritization towards middle-income country investments and infrastr...