The paradox of inequality in South Africa: a challenge from the workplace

IF 0.3 Q3 AREA STUDIES
E. Webster, David Francis
{"title":"The paradox of inequality in South Africa: a challenge from the workplace","authors":"E. Webster, David Francis","doi":"10.1353/trn.2019.0035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:The study of inequality in South Africa presents something of a paradox. Post-apartheid South Africa is one of the most unequal countries in the world in terms of income and wealth. The richest 10 per cent of the population earns 60 per cent of national income and owns 95 per cent of all wealth and assets. These high levels of inequality have been sustained, and in some cases have deepened in the post-apartheid era. However, the country has one of the most progressive constitutions in the world, one which is underpinned by a radical Bill of Rights which foregrounds expanded socio-economic rights. The parallel existence of these apparently contradictory phenomena is what we call the South African inequality paradox. We present three examples from the South African workplace where progressive policy instruments and legislation exist alongside persistent and widening inequality. We suggest that a dependence on Black Economic Empowerment, as one of the ANC government's most important attempts to transform the racialised economy of the past has resulted in the capital relations which produce and reproduce inequality remaining largely intact.","PeriodicalId":45045,"journal":{"name":"Transformation-Critical Perspectives on Southern Africa","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"18","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transformation-Critical Perspectives on Southern Africa","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/trn.2019.0035","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18

Abstract

Abstract:The study of inequality in South Africa presents something of a paradox. Post-apartheid South Africa is one of the most unequal countries in the world in terms of income and wealth. The richest 10 per cent of the population earns 60 per cent of national income and owns 95 per cent of all wealth and assets. These high levels of inequality have been sustained, and in some cases have deepened in the post-apartheid era. However, the country has one of the most progressive constitutions in the world, one which is underpinned by a radical Bill of Rights which foregrounds expanded socio-economic rights. The parallel existence of these apparently contradictory phenomena is what we call the South African inequality paradox. We present three examples from the South African workplace where progressive policy instruments and legislation exist alongside persistent and widening inequality. We suggest that a dependence on Black Economic Empowerment, as one of the ANC government's most important attempts to transform the racialised economy of the past has resulted in the capital relations which produce and reproduce inequality remaining largely intact.
南非不平等的悖论:来自工作场所的挑战
摘要:对南非不平等现象的研究呈现出一种悖论。在收入和财富方面,种族隔离后的南非是世界上最不平等的国家之一。最富有的10%人口赚取60%的国民收入,拥有95%的财富和资产。在后种族隔离时代,这种高度的不平等一直存在,在某些情况下还加深了。然而,该国拥有世界上最进步的宪法之一,其基础是一项激进的《权利法案》,其前景是扩大社会经济权利。这些明显矛盾的现象同时存在,我们称之为南非不平等悖论。我们提出了三个来自南非工作场所的例子,其中进步的政策工具和立法与持续不断扩大的不平等并存。我们认为,作为非国大政府改造过去种族化经济的最重要尝试之一,对黑人经济赋权的依赖导致了产生和再生产不平等的资本关系在很大程度上保持不变。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信