stiglitz321_ROBYN BECKAFP via Getty Images_USinequality

Politics

不平等与民主

Aug 31, 2023 Joseph E. Stiglitz

发自纽约——近年来人们对民主的退却和专制主义的崛起议论众多，这是有道理的。从匈牙利总理维克托·欧尔班（Viktor Orbán）到巴西前总统雅伊尔·博尔索纳罗（Jair Bolsonaro）和美国前总统唐纳德·特朗普（Donald Trump），我们看见了越来越多的专制主义者和引导某种奇特右翼民粹主义的潜在专制者。虽然他们承诺会保护普通公民和维护长期奉行的国家价值观，但其推行的政策却保护了权贵并破坏了由来已久的规范——也让我们其他人尝试去解释他们为何具备如此吸引力。

虽然相关的解释很多，但其中一个突出原因是不平等状况的加剧，这是现代新自由主义资本主义所带来的一个问题，也在很多方面与对民主的侵蚀有关。尽管各国的程度各不相同，但经济不平等必然导致政治不平等。在美国这样一个对竞选捐款几乎不设限的国家，“一人一票”已经演变成了“一美元一票”。

这种政治上的不平等状况会自我强化，催生出进一步巩固经济不平等状况的政策。税收政策有利于富人，教育制度有利于已享有特权者，而设计和执行不当的反托拉斯法规往往会让企业肆意积累和利用市场势力。此外由于媒体被鲁珀特·默多克（Rupert Murdoch）等财阀拥有的私人公司所控制，因此大部分主流言论都倾向于巩固同样的趋势。收看新闻的人们长期以来一直被告知说对富人征税会损害经济增长，遗产税是对死亡征收的税款等等。

To continue reading, register now.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Already have an account? Log in

Introductory Offer: Save 30% on PS Digital

Subscribe now to gain greater access to Project Syndicate – including every commentary and our entire On Point suite of subscriber-exclusive content – starting at less than $5 per month.

Subscribe Now

Joseph E. Stiglitz

Writing for PS since 2001
331 Commentaries

Joseph E. Stiglitz, a Nobel laureate in economics and University Professor at Columbia University, is a former chief economist of the World Bank (1997-2000), chair of the US President’s Council of Economic Advisers, and co-chair of the High-Level Commission on Carbon Prices. He is Co-Chair of the Independent Commission for the Reform of International Corporate Taxation and was lead author of the 1995 IPCC Climate Assessment.

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 18 Comments on this article

rgibbins Sep 10, 2023

Professor, as a firm supporter of Christina Kirchner and Alberto Fernandez in Argentina, did you learn anything around the limits to populism? Do you feel your colleague Guzman was effective, or made a complete mess? I wonder if this present economic outcome in Argentina was what your theory predicted from the measures you supported vociferously?
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Mark Breza Sep 6, 2023

Everyone always looks at their contemporary crisis as the only or worst situation in history however it seems there has always been strife in Amerika between the rich and poor. One could even argue it was the powerful nobles or elite landowners in the new world who figured out it was easier to manipulate the lower masses< who even today are hardly enfranchised, than an educated King.
- seksualusis x Sep 8, 2023
  
  Yes, but. There is progressive nature of the wealth concentration. Processed by time, it makes fewer entities projecting over whole populations, whole markets, those being increasingly globalized, leaving the shrinking number of relevant actors. This can't go on without progressively induced harm. Middle class? Many tell it is washed out. This leaves more of the struggling ones and fewer of the prospering. Idea in the article is to take care of returning democracy and capability trough rethinking opportunities for prosperity. We have to address concentration of wealth. It is not playing our way by making more of un-free, un-healthy ones.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Robert Wolff Sep 7, 2023
  
  You are correct!
  
  https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-OpYLBbxqRVv9ReCTyWg9HOmYI0w-gWX/view?usp=sharing
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Joe Dev Sep 5, 2023

I totally agree that neo liberalism (made in usa) has corrompted the whole political sphere practically globally, and that democracy is in crisis, as a consequence of that. Meaning that today money is the only ruler, to the point of politicians and even a lot of economists now only think of themselves, their own interests, total individualism. Int other words, the fall of collective importance... There is something I believe is missing and a little out of focus here, with all due respect, is that it is very cliché and easy to talk about the same people all the time because they are the ¨bad¨ ones. What is really worrisome today and much more than Trump´s case, is the way Biden´s goverment have ¨handle¨ or manipulated the Ukranian war, how the justice departement and the FBI (pilars of us democracy and institutionalism) have failed as never before in protecting corruption before democracy , forcing families and companies with wokism and many more... That´s for the US. But in Europe, Orband looks like a baby in front of Macron´s goverment. The reforms that bring down the french poorest and midle class have been passed on by decree, one after the other, around 10 decree (49-3) in less than 2 month, with no interest what so ever to consider external opinions, prohibiting manifestations and much more. They want to run the country like a banking corporation, they're own, and that is definitely not sustainable for the rest. These are the political realities that are consequence of neo libralist governments (would they present themselves like it or not), that are inciting autocratic ¨democracies¨, which are much worst, have a greater international impact and destructing all progress towards development. A. De Tocqueville righteously had identified autocratic issues with democracy, before the US was even the US, the fact that modern history does not pay attention to this is because it is not convenient to elites that shape ¨democracies¨.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Patrice Horner Sep 3, 2023

One wonders what incentives will prompt the economic elite to accept some level of equalization. The gap keeps growing and they likely spend more on tax accounts than taxes, while exploiting cheap labour to expand corporate profits. They would rather reach escape velocity than see what is going on in the broader populace.
- seksualusis x Sep 8, 2023
  
  Well, at least it seems to be attractive for those wealthy and mighty to take part in the projects, shaping the future. It well might be, they find these challenges worth their time and resource spent. We salute them there!
  
  Then, as per the article, we should be reinventing our prosperity. Our future. We should seek being enablers for the societies. History never was empty of evolution, it must go on, and we have to recognize where we are, and what projects could make us be in the better place. It is clear, that just shallow concentration of power, control, influence does not do without the sparks of ideas and efforts. Are we empty of those? How longer yet this could be?
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Tony MrTonyD Sep 4, 2023
  
  Patrice -- When you mentioned "incentives to prompt the economic elite", I couldn't help but remember the John Kenneth Galbraith quote "It is a strange idea that the rich work better if they constantly get richer, while the poor just work better if they get poorer". It seems to me that we have all "bought it" to the greed mindset - and we now automatically think in the terms set by those with wealth and power in our society.
  - Patrice Horner Sep 4, 2023
    
    So true and so tragic.
    A new reply to this comment has been posted.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Vibhaker Baxi Sep 3, 2023

I think there are too many presumptions in believing the efficacy of the democracies which we tend to laud. Democracies are pretty much owned by big money through donations, cronyism, "think tanks", lobby entities and ownership of media (print and electronic) and now even social media. The notion that voters can throw out parties from Government is questionable when you think of the virtual monopoly of the Conservative Party in British democracy or the Indian National Congress in India and likewise in Japan, to name a few. How is it possible to accept that the wisdom of governance is only vested in one political party pretty much most of the time? Until this fraudulent aspect of democracy is dealt with it is facile to compare that with the alternatives.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Waleed Addas Sep 3, 2023

“Democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time” , Winston Churchill. The real problem with the current system of democracy is that it allows moronic people to be elected and to govern! How can the current system be reformed so as to filter out the wheat from the chaff? This remains the main problem with democratic systems. For example, no one can drive a car in USA (or any part of the world for that matter) without going through the necessary tests and exams that S/he are safe to drive on the road, with a valid driver’s licence. Now how could the current democratic system allow anyone to “drive a whole country” without first checking on their mental, attitudinal, and physical conditions?! Unless we fix the current electoral process, such that to ensure that only the well qualified candidates can run, then it’s a hopeless situation. Inequality is the result of mismanagement of resources at the top level. Fix the top then the bottom will be automatically fixed. We need leaders who place the long term general public good at their top agenda, and at all times.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Jaap Bosma Sep 2, 2023

Good article!
One might add: les inequality will also lead to more economic growth (because poor people re-inject a higher percentage of their income into the economy)
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Dawood Mamoon Sep 1, 2023

Dear and Respected Professor Joseph Stiglitz,

Simple but a very powerful article. Why I feel that this is more of a basic lesson on welfare economics highlighting the facts on ground regarding recent outcomes for American democracy under neo liberal and capitalist economic system. As usual wise words and there are so many of them in this article.

For example I quote you:

Democracies work best when the perceived stakes are neither too low nor too high (if they are too low, people will feel little need to participate in the democratic process at all). There are design choices that democracies can make to improve the chances of hitting this happy medium. Parliamentary systems, for example, encourage coalition building and often give power to centrists, rather than extremists.

I think the reference to stakes is actually trying to tell more than what is written here. Not too low stakes and neither very high stakes. Now I am wondering and as you write that American democracy is somewhat failing its people, is it that the stakes have gone too low. But at the same time stakes are very very high because it is only USA where the democracy has delivered so much in its historic context especially for a century or so. Yes you also brilliantly mention that there is not much of difference either in Biden Administration or Trump when both administrations are favoring the corporate sector and the rich corporation. You are right that the reason is simple and that is campaign financing rules that create a lot of influence of multi billion dollars and soon to be multi trillion dollars corporations.

I hope other readers also note down the brilliance in your reference to stakes. It can explain everything going good or bad or ugly for the US. Yes if Donald Trump wins and he reverse American commitments on Net Zero emissions, the stake wouldnt get any higher to have President Biden again even if he is holding a glass of champaign while welcoming the delegates from Saudi Arabia. I do accept there might be some endogeniety in stakes on Net Zero Emissions and befreidning the exporters of Fossil Fuels. But then world is still far behind in their Net Zero Emissions and for few decades Fossil Fuel is the cheapest way to get the life of common Joe going.

We have a very recent example of European reliance on Russian Oil and as soon the conflict lasted for few months, Europe has to rely on Middle East to avoid a serious recession in their economies. The biggest fact is every year both the need and utility of Energy resources are going to multiply across the globe.

In this talk the corporate America is the solution and also part of the problem. Assuming the trend of American ingeniuity in innovation and creativity, Green energy methods become more economicall, well the whole world would be celebrating.

The probability is high that more resources on R&D of green energy initiatives are going to lead to new technologies and their commercial value. But still it is a probability and within a year US elections are coming. Reading American Newspapers like Bloomberg, I already know that the Producers of Shale Gas are not happy with new taxes on them and production of Shale Gas hasnt increased to the extent of increase in demand of energy in the US.

Well who cares? It is not the man or a woman but it has to be a law and decree that should work for the best benefit of people. Yes, legislature should be influenced by common man or a woman in a democracy. And you also accept that conservative politics have become mainstream among the white population of the US.

A thinking mind tends to become liberal or that is why I am a liberal. Liberalism simply means freedom. Personal freedom while adhering to the law of the land. And law of the land is made by the people, for the people.

I view of the debate on Net Zero emissions, I am wondering how I should place the debate of increasing inequalities. It is multi trillion dollars of investments and their propriety rights for a Private enterprise and business conglomerate that would be the best incentive to innovate and develop green technologies and green products. Yes to save our future generations Biden either has to further greese the influence of Private Enterprise or alternatively he has to be good friends with Saudi Arabia. I think he is doing both and you think it is not the right way.

In equality in an American society moves beyond basic needs and thereby Neo Classical Economics has delivered in the US. Countries like Pakistan where extreme poverty is rampant, inequality becomes a serious issue and same is true for many developing countries.

By the way development of Green Technologies is talking about an entirely new world. And then their commercial applications are going to shape the world economy in the next decade. While the rest of the world other than the developed North (currently even developed North is hugely dependent on Fossil Fuels for Energy), most of the developing world would still be using Fossil Fuels since it would not a great business deal to make all the future green technologies available to the consumers of developing countries for free.

Professor Joe, I would love to be discussing with your 100 plus years young self like other fans of yours how the global political economy be shaped when green technologies become a reality. More so, I would love your take on all those multi trillion dollars worth of conglomerates and private enterprises who have developed those green technologies and to make the world greener, would the future Bill Gates be giving it all for free to developing countries.

Your article was too good for its readers as it subtly discusses many things other than democracy and inequality. I feel like writing few 100 words more, but just to mention in conclusion that my other favorite Professor Daron Acemoglu has in PS spaces asked whether governments even in US would be inclined to nationalize Private Enterprise. Though the discussion was in context of AI but it can equally be made about Green technologies and the future world. And Inequality has been one of the most closer ally of nationalization debate.

But professor how much I have understood American democracy, no challenge is big enough for great American nation. I am still learning to be a good student of American politics and economics. Not to mention Science too.
- Robert Wolff Sep 1, 2023
  
  Interesting viewpoint, Dawood, that a "Socially Guided" format for Top Management (Government and Corporate and Banking) decision-making is the solution, ala Stiglitz' Analysis, but as Joseph explained that will require an entirely different philosophy than that which currently drives the Western Elites' Realism based on Western Capitalism and their rule through "The Power of Wealth and the consequent Control of the World by the Western Money System" by those who control it..
  
  Stiglitz' view will require that Socialism (supersession of control by Government over 'Private Interests') for stabilizing "Society" supersedes the power of the Western Capitalist "Elites".
  
  Mearsheimer's theory of Realism condemns your analytical and emotionally faithful hopes: "Hope is not a strategy."
  
  https://drive.google.com/file/d/1SzMCyU74ZqLg5NZE-CGstluDbYn_WGyR/view?usp=sharing
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Dawood Mamoon Sep 1, 2023

Dear and Respected Professor Joseph Stiglitz,

Simple but a very powerful article. Why I feel that this is more of a basic lesson on welfare economics highlighting the facts on ground regarding recent outcomes for American democracy under neo liberal and capitalist economic system. As usual wise words and there are so many of them in this article.

For example I quote you:

Democracies work best when the perceived stakes are neither too low nor too high (if they are too low, people will feel little need to participate in the democratic process at all). There are design choices that democracies can make to improve the chances of hitting this happy medium. Parliamentary systems, for example, encourage coalition building and often give power to centrists, rather than extremists.

I think the reference to stakes is actually trying to tell more than what is written here. Not too low stakes and neither very high stakes. Now I am wondering and as you write that American democracy is somewhat failing its people, is it that the stakes have gone too low. But at the same time stakes are very very high because it is only USA where the democracy has delivered so much in its historic context especially for a century or so. Yes you also brilliantly mention that there is not much of difference either in Biden Administration or Trump when both administrations are favoring the corporate sector and the rich corporation. You are right that the reason is simple and that is campaign financing rules that create a lot of influence of multi billion dollars and soon to be multi trillion dollars corporations.

I hope other readers also note down the brilliance in your reference to stakes. It can explain everything going good or bad or ugly for the US. Yes if Donald Trump wins and he reverse American commitments on Net Zero emissions, the stake wouldnt get any higher to have President Biden again even if he is holding a glass of champaign while welcoming the delegates from Saudi Arabia. I do accept there might be some endogeniety in stakes on Net Zero Emissions and befreidning the exporters of Fossil Fuels. But then world is still far behind in their Net Zero Emissions and for few decades Fossil Fuel is the cheapest way to get the life of common Joe going.

We have a very recent example of European reliance on Russian Oil and as soon the conflict lasted for few months, Europe has to rely on Middle East to avoid a serious recession in their economies. The biggest fact is every year both the need and utility of Energy resources are going to multiply across the globe.

In this talk the corporate America is the solution and also part of the problem. Assuming the trend of American ingeniuity in innovation and creativity, Green energy methods become more economicall, well the whole world would be celebrating.

The probability is high that more resources on R&D of green energy initiatives are going to lead to new technologies and their commercial value. But still it is a probability and within a year US elections are coming. Reading American Newspapers like Bloomberg, I already know that the Producers of Shale Gas are not happy with new taxes on them and production of Shale Gas hasnt increased to the extent of increase in demand of energy in the US.

Well who cares? It is not the man or a woman but it has to be a law and decree that should work for the best benefit of people. Yes, legislature should be influenced by common man or a woman in a democracy. And you also accept that conservative politics have become mainstream among the white population of the US.

A thinking mind tends to become liberal or that is why I am a liberal. Liberalism simply means freedom. Personal freedom while adhering to the law of the land. And law of the land is made by the people, for the people.

I view of the debate on Net Zero emissions, I am wondering how I should place the debate of increasing inequalities. It is multi trillion dollars of investments and their propriety rights for a Private enterprise and business conglomerate that would be the best incentive to innovate and develop green technologies and green products. Yes to save our future generations Biden either has to further greese the influence of Private Enterprise or alternatively he has to be good friends with Saudi Arabia. I think he is doing both and you think it is not the right way.

In equality in an American society moves beyond basic needs and thereby Neo Classical Economics has delivered in the US. Countries like Pakistan where extreme poverty is rampant, inequality becomes a serious issue and same is true for many developing countries.

By the way development of Green Technologies is talking about an entirely new world. And then their commercial applications are going to shape the world economy in the next decade. While the rest of the world other than the developed North (currently even developed North is hugely dependent on Fossil Fuels for Energy), most of the developing world would still be using Fossil Fuels since it would not a great business deal to make all the future green technologies available to the consumers of developing countries for free.

Professor Joe, I would love to be discussing with your 100 plus years young self like other fans of yours how the global political economy be shaped when green technologies become a reality. More so, I would love your take on all those multi trillion dollars worth of conglomerates and private enterprises who have developed those green technologies and to make the world greener, would the future Bill Gates be giving it all for free to developing countries.

Your article was too good for its readers as it subtly discusses many things other than democracy and inequality. I feel like writing few 100 words more, but just to mention in conclusion that my other favorite Professor Daron Acemoglu has in PS spaces asked whether governments even in US would be inclined to nationalize Private Enterprise. Though the discussion was in context of AI but it can equally be made about Green technologies and the future world. And Inequality has been one of the most closer ally of nationalization debate.

But professor how much I have understood American democracy, no challenge is big enough for great American nation. I am still learning to be a good student of American politics and economics. Not to mention Science too.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
alex Finch Aug 31, 2023

Ironically inequality has increased in urban China, yet after starting at zero, the median household wealth of 900 million urban Chinese citizens is now higher than in Germany or Austria. The Chinese achieved this by adopting a capitalist system after 2001, while Germany and Austria adhered to socialist redistribution of income and wealth. The overall standard of living in urban China has risen tremendously in 20yrs while it has been stagnant at best in Europe. The cracks are now starting to appear in Germany and Austria, unable to deliver on the generous pensions, healthcare and social housing socialism promised. It’s surprising how many socialists remain defiant, living in denial to the point of being arrogantly delusional.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Robert Wolff Aug 31, 2023

Given Aristotle's description of Democracy, there is no difference between what is Moral and what is Democratic. Without Democratic Consensus (not guaranteed simply by "Democratic" Elections) lawlessness and chaos naturally increase.

Only the Moral Middle Class is founded on "Legal Conformity". Legal conformity increases as the Middle Class grows and decreases as the Middle Class shrinks. Once the Middle Class stops growing and begins to shrink the liberal "One Inclusive God" falters and the multiple conservative indigenous " Exclusive Gods" rise to war against one other.

Nobody doubts that in America that Middle Class and Middle-Class Values are waning while the Exclusive God of the 1% Elites prevails over the Inclusive God of the Middle Class. Today, the Middle Class is no longer growing to include more and more of the Lower Class, and the Upper Class is no longer growing in population percentage [which requires Social Upward Mobility of the Middle Class]. When Upward Mobility within a society ceases, that marks the Death Knell of Democracy. Only Autocracy can then maintain Social Order through the use of fear and police-state regimentation of the unhappy and rebellious majority that resents their exclusion from "Life" by the Ruling Elites. Compliance with The Law is replaced by a Reign of Terror imposed by Autocratic Principles of terrorizing the majority into cowardice and their acceptance of the Oppressive State.

The origin and cause of the rise of "Violence and Criminality" in current-day America is the concentration of American power into an "Exclusive Elite" that excludes the Middle Class from political power and eliminates Upward Mobility of the combined Lower and Middle Classes. The inevitable result is Chaos. The only historical "Solution" according to Karl Marx, once this situation comes into existence, is Violent Revolution of the Majority against the oppressive rule of the Elites.

https://underground.net/aristotle-and-the-middle-class/#:~:text=Aristotle%20pointed%20out%20that%20if%20the%20middle%20class,to%20take%20away%20the%20money%20from%20the%20rich%21
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Paul Friesen Aug 31, 2023

I agree. We need an economic system that rewards work and enterprise, but that does not punish those unable to work so severely. This will become more and more necessary as technology advances. Fewer and fewer people are going to be able to find things to do that machines cannot do better. Some day, your job, too, will be done by a machine.

This does not need to be a problem, as long as we understand that it is happening and take action. We need to regard all this technological knowledge as the property of everybody, not just of the few in a position to deploy it. Everybody deserves to get paid for this knowledge. Everybody deserves part of what it creates. We need a system that recognizes this. For example, we could collect sales taxes and distribute the proceeds as a basic income.

So far, the approach of most has been very head-in-the-sand. People say computers will never be able to do this or that. But things computers can't do are beginning to fall fast. And never is a very long time.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

https://prosyn.org/FAyQDGUzh

不平等与民主

Introductory Offer: Save 30% on PS Digital

New Comment

Contact us

Log in/Register

不平等与民主

Introductory Offer: Save 30% on PS Digital

Edit Newsletter Preferences

Set up Notification