Rising manifestations of inequality in the South African context and the effects of globalisation.
Globalisation has become the defining process of the present age. “In the past century, there has been a technological explosion, largely in the domain of transportation and information, that makes the interactions of a print-dominated world seem as hard-won and as easily erased as the print revolution made earlier forms of cultural traffic appear.” (Appadurai 47). Globalisation is a very uneven process, with unequal distribution of benefits and losses. “This imbalance leads to polarisation between the few countries and groups that gain, and the many countries and groups in society that lose out or are marginalized.” (Khor 53). The uneven and unequal nature of the present globalisation is manifested and reflected by the fast growing gap between the world’s (and more specially South Africa’s), rich and poor people and between developed and developing countries; and by the large differences among nations in the distribution of gains and losses. “The complexity of the current global economy has to do with certain fundamental disjunctures between economy, culture, and politics…” (Appadurai 50). The manifestation of inequality as an effect of globalisation stems from several factors in the South African context and due to several weaknesses to be discussed; South Africa has been unable to reap the benefits of globalisation as the developed world has experienced and reaped these benefits.
South Africa entered globalisation with a weak social infrastructure due largely to the apartheid regime experience and economic weakness due to a lack of domestic economic capacity. South Africa faces the dilemma of whether it should open itself up to the globalisation process wholly (in the hope of obtaining benefits), or to take a more cautious approach to avoid risks. “The challenge is whether developing countries can take advantage of the liberalisation process, whilst at the same time avoiding or minimising the disruptive consequences on their societies and economies.” (Khor 55). In the South African context, the ability of the government to manage liberalisation and globalisation will be a crucial aspect of national policy making currently, and in the years ahead.
“Perhaps the most important and unique feature of the current globalisation process is the ‘globalisation’ of national policies and policy-making mechanisms. National policies (including in economic, social and cultural and technological areas) that until recently were under the jurisdiction of states and people within a country have increasingly come under the influence of international agencies and processes or by big corporations and economic/financial players.” (Khor 51). The implication of this in the South African context is the erosion of national sovereignty and narrowed ability by the government and people to make choices from options in economic, social and cultural policies. Thus, South Africa has to some extent experienced an erosion of its independent policy-making capacity and has had to adopt policies made by other entities, which may be viewed as negative or detrimental in certain cases. “…it is the persisting crisis of under-development in the South, of a South that is not much neglected as actively linked into debilitating accumulation patterns centred on the North, that lies at the heart of the South African reality…” (The North is not our axis: The Mail and Guardian article attached). On a cultural level, of interest to anthropologists, this phenomenon also holds true, “…fears to Americanisation could be greatly expanded, but it is not a shapeless inventory: for polities of smaller scale, there is always a fear of cultural absorption by polities of larger scale… One man’s imagined community is another man’s prison.” (Appadurai 50). In the South African context the manifestation of inequality in terms of increasing levels of unemployment, the lack of job security, the stagnation of income levels (or unequal distribution of income as portrayed in The Cape Argus, “Apartheid alive as gulf between rich and poor widens”), thus the continuing concentration of income and property and the rising cost of essential public services are among the main features of the social exclusion caused by liberal policies, which ought to be addressed. Although within the South African context two clear axis of social, as well as national economic development are in need of attention, anthropologists focus primarily on the social axis, as well as factors attributed to this axis, such as unequal distribution of income, international pressures, as well as various other manifestations of inequality within the South African context. “There are clearly no easy answers to the dilemma encountered in any attempt to address policy making. The disjunctures between policy and academic discourses are embedded in power relations.” (Spiegel, Watson & Wilkinson 183-184). “There are now many serious critics who are deeply concerned about the current forms of globalisation and its associated ideology of neo-liberalism. The values of neo-liberalism are being attacked on the grounds that they prioritise free-market individualism over social values and the common good. An abundance of evidence is being generated to show that the actual outcomes of neo-liberal globalisation are increasing inequality globally and driving large segments of society into structural unemployment and poverty.” (Turok 1: See attached Mail and Guardian article).
From an anthropological perspective it is important to highlight the fact that the globalisation process has mainly been driven by policy choices at global and specifically at national level, in the South African context, in recent years and has led to the rapid liberalisation of finance, trade and investment. The decision making process in making these policy choices has mainly been dominated by governments of the developed countries and by international institutions (key institutions include the World Bank, the IMF and the WTO) that are mainly under their influence of control. There is a growing awareness that although globalisation has had many positive influences in terms of technological advancement and interconnectedness, it has also removed power from the state and therefore from the citizens, whose “contract” is with their government, not with the new array of multi-lateral institutions that exert influence and power in terms of policy and other forms of control. In the South African context there is also an awareness that democracy has not delivered satisfactory development in terms of increased job availability, education and health care for its citizens. In fact, according to Ellis, (see attached Mail and Guardian article), a massive rise in unemployment has resulted in an exacerbated problem, delineated by the article in terms of a racialised trajectory, confirming deepening inequality in our society.
