blog link

http://www3.ntu.edu.sg/home/sulfikar/hs103blogs.html

Lecture 2 – Poverty

Lecture 2 – Poverty

 

Definition of poverty:

Sometimes, the term poverty may not necessarily refer to the condition of being deficient in the material realm. It may also refer to the state of being extremely poor spiritually. For the context of Lecture 2, we are concerned with material poverty.

 

Poverty as a concept of relativity

My opinion is that every society must have some level of poverty, just as each society would have some degree of suicides and crimes despite society’s effort to eradicate the deviant behaviors. Therefore, relative poverty is the more appropriate concept for the discussion here. Relative poverty can be understood from 2 perspectives – vertically and horizontally. Vertical relative poverty looks within a society and measures the inequality between the rich and the poor. Horizontal relative poverty compares across societies and measures the inequality of national wealth and income. Besides income, other factors used in measuring inequality include the level of education received by the people, the life expectancy of the population and the purchasing power of the consumers.

 

Poverty and Capitalism

Since poverty is closely associated with unequal wealth distribution, we must thus examine how the prevalent system of distribution – capitalism – gives rise to inequality. Also, the various responses to capitalism can be illustrated with a dialogue between the ghosts of Adam Smith and Karl Marx

 

Both theorists agreed that modern capitalism is marked with great degree of competition, as well as division of labor (DOL) – a process whereby production activities are each broken down into smaller, simpler tasks. However, Smith approved it while Marx attributed poverty to it.

 

Smith, through his empirical observation of factories which adopted DOL, concluded that DOL allows capitalism to be the most efficient mean of production. Competition also propels people to become more efficient and cost-saving so that social wealth is maximized with commodities produced and sold at lower price. I infer that Smith implied that some actors are in poverty because they lose out in competition. Yet, the government should not intervene lest the perfect market system will be distorted. If this is truly the case, I cannot conceive how Smith’s theory is relevant. In reality, most poor people lose out in competition because they have fewer resources e.g. lower educational qualification and less extensive social network for career opportunities. In this note, Smith assumed actors to be homogenous when they are not most of the time. If the government does not intervene, I believe that the Invisible Hand will perpetuate poverty since disadvantaged actors will continue to lose out in future competitions. Therefore, I think Smith’s theory, while educated us on the economic benefit of capitalism, is devoid of any realistic discussion of social problems arising from capitalism.

 

Marx presented the opposite viewpoint. He believed that capitalism is a system of alienation – the separation of human being from their true nature. One example of alienation is that actors, who labor and produce the commodities, do not possess the ownership of the things they made. Rather, the ownership belongs to the capitalists who control the means of production, such as raw material, capital and the factories. Capitalism is thus a mean to exploitation of the poor and perpetuation of poverty. Marx predicted that the amount of contradictions with the capitalist society would eventually lead to its collapse, upon the awakening class consciousness of the laborers who would rebel against their exploiters. Thus, Marx’s solution for poverty is to abolish the capitalist system.

 

My overall response:

I rarely agree with Smith because his assumption of human being as absolutely economic man is not realistic. With such flawed assumption as the foundation of his market theory, it is natural for him to neglect the social aspect of Man and society. Here, Marx highlighted the social need of Man to enjoy work and that DOL in capitalist production is not rewarding at all because he is reduced to a tiny gear in the entire production chain. However, I always think that Marx, in his overly idealistic attempts to revolutionize, had unfortunately become compulsively critical and failed to discuss his handover plan on what we should do about social problems. (Although his solution lies in the abolishment of capitalism, he did not discuss extensively about how communism should operate to prevent future social problems)

Lecture 1: What is social problems in Global Context

Definition of social problems:
A problem is a situation, matter, or person that presents perplexity or difficulty. A social problem is community-specific problem. It affects the general members of a society. Social problems are usually rooted in the prevailing social structure and thus arise from the interaction between social institutions (and their policies), social culture (belief and norms of the mass population) and individuals. Social problems exist and affect at both material and ideological level.

Examples of social problems:
Material level – poverty, domestic violence, racial discrimination
Ideological level – ready acceptance of the existence of military forces, egocentrism, meritocracy

Problem with that Definition:
Despite the above general definition for social problems, each society defines social problems differently. For example, the idea of gender equality is a desirable pursuit for many westernized societies. However, in many middle-east societies, gender inequality and domestic violence against the female members are acceptable.

The definition of social problems is society-specific because each society has its unique social structure which dictates what should be regarded as social problems and what not. The formal rules laid by institutions eg. Judiciary system and the informal rules echoed by culture through social norms, values and beliefs help define what is acceptable by the society.

3 Possible Natures of Social Problem
In our first reading, Introduction – Approaches to Social Problems – the characteristics and developments for the definition of social definition are explored.

Social Problem is moral
In the past, social problems were mainly defined by moralists. This is probably because the society had a common set of dominating values governing what was acceptable or not. The social problems identified were mainly relating to actors’ deviant behavior. The approach to solve social problems is to eradicate such behavior by changing the defective actors. The morals were institutionalized to regulate punish and change defective actors.

Social Problem is political
Waller argued that social sciences are to be objective and value-free. Social problems are not defined by absoluteness of the moralists. Usually, there will be conflicting and competing views in the definition of problems. For example, the Christian churches believe that abortion is a problem, a wrongdoing. However, other members of society may ready accept abortion as a legitimate mean of population control. For Waller, such conflicting view over objective social conditions is the social problem. People’s unwillingness to alter basic conditions perpetuate a certain social condition. Waller argued that social scientists can study the mental frameworks of people and identify the ‘taken for granted’ components which readily accept or reject a certain social condition. For example, the Bible instructs that abortion is a violation of sacred life and therefore Christians regards abortion as a sin, a social problem.

Social Problem is Technical
Merton classified social problems into 2 categories – manifest and latent problems. In the past, moralists dealt mainly with manifest problems of deviant behaviors. However, social scientists are to identify the latent problems because they are not as obvious and are hidden from within the complex social structures. Social problems can also be divided into deviant behavior and social disorganization. Both disrupt the existing social order.

Solving Social Problems
Horton and Leslie argue against extremism as an approach to solving social problems. The extreme alteration of basic conditions which give rise to the problems will inevitably lead to institutional changes. Rapid institutional changes are costly, difficult and disruptive. Therefore, Horton and Leslie proposed gradualism and realism as the better approach. Also, experts must step in to help administer the changes.

Social Problem in Global context
The modern world economy is characterized by globalization, a process by which the economies of countries around the world become increasingly integrated over time. Globalization not only increases international trade, but also led to greater cultural exchange. However, globalization’s immense impact on economy, society and culture also brings about undesirable fast spread of social problems, such as widening income gaps, environmental degradation and ideological conflicts.

In HS103, we can expect to learn how the process of globalization leads to recurring social problems.

 

Hello world!

Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!