1. Summary
Neolithic inequality means that people cannot access scarce and valuable resources in society. This inequality is not just happening in the Neolithic Age. The source of inequality can be found in the search, collection, and transition from a horticulture to a horticulture society. There were no surplus goods in the hunter-gatherer community, the division of labor was small, and people did almost the same thing. On the other hand, farming communities have more time to do other things and trade than they did in hunting societies. This is what led to inequality. The reason for the continued inequality is that the rich and powerful are protecting the system. Also, culture teaches acceptance of inequality.
The architectural functional approach to layering is essential. They believe it is natural to offer more rewards to motivate the most qualified to fill the most important positions. On the other hand, conflict theorists argue that layering is a social problem. This is because tiering systems are already created and perpetuated in a defined way.
2. What did you learn / What was interesting?
It was surprising that culture, one of the reasons why inequality persists, teaches acceptance of inequality. It is wrong to teach that poverty is their fault because they are just lazy and irresponsible. It was also shocking that police, courts, and prisons work together to protect the system of inequality. Modernists believe that massive economic growth is the key to reducing poverty in poor countries. Colonialism and neo-liberalism are the causes of world poverty. Countries developed at an uneven rate because rich countries exploited poor countries through foreign debt and multinational companies.
3. Discussion Point
We are trying to resolve these inequalities. One example is a fair trade. We hope it will be more expensive, but by using fair trade products, it will help the economy of developing countries. However, if a fair trader applies a fair trade to a particular crop (cocoa, coffee), farmers who grow the other crops will give up the production of the other crops to get better prices. It could undermine the industrial base in the region. So, can this really be seen as helping them? What do you think about it?
No comments:
Post a Comment