This paper aims to portray the world system as a primary cause of global economic inequalities. First, it will introduce Marxism, which would be used as a theoretical framework for subsequent analysis of how the world system is the primary cause of global economic inequality. It will then move to the contemporary global political economy and then illuminate the extent to which Marxism explains the phenomenon of global inequality and the relevant Marxist argument about the consequences of global income inequality. Finally, the paper will conclude on the inaccuracy of Marx’s prediction in a capitalist economy.
The rise in income inequality has become a major issue in contemporary global politics, which is the working of the capitalist economy …show more content…
For Marx, the economic structure was flawed with class struggles, a materialist world where in order to survive, one must have the material means to enter a definite social relation, a relation which is tied mainly to production, (Sans and Stoett 2014). As a result, the capitalist society was seen as an element of class division based on relations to the means of production, mainly: the bourgeoisie and the …show more content…
2011). The core, referred to the rich countries composed of well functional, technological and manufacturing system, skilled and highly paid labour (e.g USA), (Haynes, et al. 2011). In contrast, the periphery referred to the poor countries (e.g, Congo, India), endowed with raw materials, unskilled and cheap labor needed for the production of goods by the core, (Haynes, et al. 2011). The core constantly extracted raw materials and cheap labour from the periphery in exchange for basic manufactured goods. The unequal exchange continued until the gap between the core and the periphery widened, and thus, created global inequality, (Haynes, et al. 2011). Therefore, subjugating the periphery into a dependent position where they rely on the core countries for economic returns and betterment, (Sans and Stoett
The rise in income inequality has become a major issue in contemporary global politics, which is the working of the capitalist economy …show more content…
For Marx, the economic structure was flawed with class struggles, a materialist world where in order to survive, one must have the material means to enter a definite social relation, a relation which is tied mainly to production, (Sans and Stoett 2014). As a result, the capitalist society was seen as an element of class division based on relations to the means of production, mainly: the bourgeoisie and the …show more content…
2011). The core, referred to the rich countries composed of well functional, technological and manufacturing system, skilled and highly paid labour (e.g USA), (Haynes, et al. 2011). In contrast, the periphery referred to the poor countries (e.g, Congo, India), endowed with raw materials, unskilled and cheap labor needed for the production of goods by the core, (Haynes, et al. 2011). The core constantly extracted raw materials and cheap labour from the periphery in exchange for basic manufactured goods. The unequal exchange continued until the gap between the core and the periphery widened, and thus, created global inequality, (Haynes, et al. 2011). Therefore, subjugating the periphery into a dependent position where they rely on the core countries for economic returns and betterment, (Sans and Stoett