Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Inequality - Coggle Diagram
Inequality
Disrupt the narrative
Meritocracy
-
Individual narratives of worth: The promise pf inequality is often described as a promise of mobility. Meritocracy is not about equal outcomes, it is about fair, equal opportunities for all.
"What the education system does when it selects, sorts and hierarchizes, and when it gives its stamp of approval to those 'at the top', is that it renders those who succeed through the system as legitimately deserving. Left implicit is those at the bottom who have failed to be derserving." (pg 26)
What is often forgotten, because of the pertinence of this narrative, is that this is a meritocratic system. To keep the system functional, it can only reward a narrow kind of merit. The merit in our meritocratic educational system is a combination of intelligence and test-taking skills.
This could propagate the notion that intelliegnce is objectively the most desirable trait. With intelligence acting a yardstick for how "successful" one this, a moral problem crops up.
"We could say that the national narrative of mobilty is powerfully grafted onto [their] individual narraties of worth."
Consequence of the meritocratic educational system on Singapore: An instinctive rush towards "narrow goals and quantifiable ends" (pg 27)
Ultimately, everyone, regardless of their position in the hierachy, is still paying a cost to maintain the arbitrary value they have been assigned.
Consequence: Difficulty in suspending judgement regarding "alternative" lifestyles because they are considered "impoverished" when viewed through the lens of the Singapore narrative. There is also difficulty in appreciating and seeing the value in other strengths that are not intelligence and test-taking.
How to solve the problem: 1. Suspend internal narrative of Singapore. 2. Force oneself to see the pitalls and strengths of ALL circumstances. 3. Invert the naturalised hierarchy. 4. Break down the 'us' and 'them' divide. Accept the fact that certain trains like intelligence are only prescribed to have a higher worth nowhere else besides in this system. And people, who when measured by this yardstick are considered less valuable, should not be pressured to conform into this narrative
Much of the value that is assigned to personal strengths and advantages, really only have that value because of what those who experience upward mobility gain from it.
-
Main Claim: Inequality, is in fact, the logical outcome of meritocracy (pg 26)
The Narrative: Rags to Riches, miraculous progress and upward mobility
Inequality and Poverty, a poor fit to the Singapore narrative of progress and success: It is hard to acknowledge that inequality still exists even when we have been tirelessly striving for progress and have become "a shining Global City". These inequaltiies are not jst numbers on a paper, they are lived realities (skyscrappers vs migrant worker dorms)
Difficult to acknowledge. It is difficult to acknowledge the persistence of inequality because it begs the question: 1a. How much more, how much further do we need to progress for ineuqlaity to disappear? Are we not already successful? Does this make us unsuccessful? Does this break the narrative? 1b. If inequality still exists after so much effort, what are we truly progressing towards? Is it even possible to be entirely "free" of inequality?
Misrecognition: When we think that a system works based on a certain set of principles when in reality, it works on the baiss of another.
Mobility
Upward mobility (the act of improving one's circumstances, whcih the Singapore narrative says is primarily achieved through the meritocratic educational system)
"Spatial" mobility: How large someone's world view is, how much they know about opportunities that are out there, and their ability to aim for such opportunities
-
Priviledge
-
-
Priviledge of ignorance: The narrative of constant progress treats the past as inferior. While the past may have been a difficult time for some, this narrative propagates the priviledge of ignorance, almost protecting those that did not experience the hardships of the past from learning about it. (and the fact that one can be ignorant to such hardships highlights their own priviledge)
Privilegde of dignity: Those who have experienced upward social mobility are able, even encouraged, to look upon their past hardships with fondness. As a collective nation, our national narrative is that we have moved forward, we have imrpoved, but what about those that do not fit narrative? What about those who "have stood still" (end of pg 21)
4 Myths of Inequality
Central claim: SG Gov's approach to inequality is grounded in a number of implicit, but strongly-held assumptions about the objectives of economic policy and the relationship between economic growth and socia
-
-
Myth 3: Inequality is not really a problem as long as there isn't extreme poverty and incomes are rising across the board
The assumption: People only care about their absolute, and not relative, levels of income. However, to do so is irrational and not naturally part of human nature.
The evidence: Rising inequality causes people to be more conscious of their status and to channel more of their spending to positional goods -->expenditure cascades -->debt -->long term economic issues.
Myth 4: Since pay is tied to ability, rising inequality is simply the result of increasing differences in people's ability
-
"A trade-off means that the government should try to find the right balance of economic growth and social equity that reflects a society's preferences." (pg 37)
Why do these myths matter? "Singaporeans are more likely to be happier with a more equitable distribution of income than with further increases in per capita GDP that are not equally distributed. (pg 37)
Development
Concepts
Scenic Poverty: Picturesque environments mask deep systemic issues. (BBC) Also picteresque in the sense that it invokes a sense of pity or sympathy from us.
Becomes a form of "voyerism", because we are after all just passing by.
Ethics and morals
Maids are ostracised in Hong Kong, but are abused in Singapore
SG and HK are chosen to juxtapose wealth, excess and exclusivity of the rich against social exclusion and relative poverty of the maids.
SG and HK are chosen to highlight that no matter how developed a country is economically, it does not guaratee an equally developed and refined ethical sense.
Filipina maids cutting each other's hair outdoors shows their adaptability, generosity and friendship. Are we supposed to pity them? Is it right for us to do so?
Inequality
Inequality in terms of rights, respect and dignity.