The Human Rights Cost of Wealth Inequality

“poverty is not just a lack of money; it is not having the capability to realize one’s full potential as a human being.”: Abhijit V. Banerjee, Poor Economics: A Radical Rethinking of the Way to Fight Global Poverty

In 2022, the richest 10% of the global population took home 52% of global income, whereas the poorest 50% of the population earned 8.5% of it¹. In developing countries like India, these figures tend to be worse; the top 1% currently hold 40.1% of India’s wealth, while the bottom 50% hold just 6.4%², this is among the highest in the entire world. Between 2015 and 2024, the wealth of the top 1% increased by $42 trillion, 34 times more than the bottom 50% of the global population³.

The depth and implication of these statistics are difficult to come to terms with. It would imply that the average wealth per person in the top 1% of the world rose by $400,000 in the past decade compared to $335 for a person in the bottom half.

The defining characteristic of our current global landscape may well be its profound economic inequality, with wealth disparity reaching the highest levels in recorded history across most countries.

This is a system where concentrated wealth equates to concentrated power; the vast majority is denied fair access to essential services and the fundamental freedom to shape their own lives. It creates fertile ground for exploitation and oppression, laying bare the fallacy that high economic growth automatically translates into shared prosperity or improved lives for those struggling the most.

Historically, high levels of wealth inequality has been one of the most primary indicators of mass oppression and exploitation, eventually causing the oppressed to snap and rebel against their state in some of the most notable revolutions the world has seen.

We are today, once again, heading in the same direction.

Historical Roots and Consequences of Wealth Inequality

Our species has existed for roughly 300,000 years. For about 290,000 of those years, archaeological evidence suggests that we lived in much simpler but significantly more equal societies. We were organized in small hunter-gatherer groups where cooperation was prime; if someone took more than their supposed share, resentment would build up. These communities didn’t just happen to be equal, but actively sought equality.⁴

This long era of egalitarianism began to erode as farming gained wide-acceptance.

According to James Suzman, an anthropologist from Cambridge, UK, sharing food was prime in hunter-gatherer groups due to there being no mechanism to store their hunts. However, on the other hand, the success of farming is heavily dependent on weather conditions and seasonal rain. A family in such a society would rather store their produce to insure themselves against bad weather than distribute it among other families, who would have a similar train of thought. Sharing does not help anyone in such a society, in the event of bad weather. This would, therefore, localise the biggest benefits of farming to only those who are skilled, prepared and capable.

Farming also allowed humans to stay in one place and expand indefinitely based on their agricultural success. This increased the size of each community significantly.

As scale and localisation increased, “leaders” were born out of a “social contract” to help manage it and provide security. Although leaders often lived alongside the community in these small societies without coercive institutions like police or military, their very existence habituated people to social hierarchy.

This gradual normalization facilitated the rise of kingdoms with monarchs wielding significant power as communities grew larger, leading to the proliferation of very non-egalitarian, unequal societies.

These early monarchic states were often characterized by extreme inequality, structured to serve the interests of the monarch almost exclusively, and actions displeasing the monarch were frequently met with repression, arrest, or death. An average person in such a state would be at the sole mercy of the monarch. Such immense concentrations of power and wealth historically generated significant social tension, sometimes triggering cycles of upheaval and reaction against elite dominance.⁵

The French Revolution erupted in large part due to the profound inequalities baked into such a state. The concept of modern representative democracy, born from this upheaval, fundamentally aimed to establish a society based on equal rights and citizenship, dismantling aristocratic privilege and striving for a system where status was not predetermined by birth, thus promising a less unequal social and political order.

However, the establishment of representative democracies did not play a major role in eradicating inequality, as is evident today.

The decades after World War II did experience a period often termed the “Great Compression” in developed nations like the US, characterized by relatively lower inequality compared to before or since. This era was shaped by factors including stronger labor movements and more progressive taxation.⁶ As historical analysis suggests, the perceived threat of internal instability (recalling the upheavals around WWI) and external ideological competition (from Communism) incentivized elites in many Western democracies to enter an implicit social compact, distributing the fruits of economic growth more equitably to maintain social stability and counter the appeal of alternatives.⁷

Yet, this trend dramatically reversed starting around the 1970s and accelerating from the 1980s onwards – the period known as the “Great Divergence.”

Rise of Wealth Inequality in the West

Inequality surged after 1980 due to interplay between several overlapping factors that mirrored historical patterns. According to Peter Turchin, the founder of a transdisciplinary field of study called cliodynamics that utilizes mathematical models and historical databases to understand long-term social and historical processes, there are 4 major reasons for this surge of inequality.

The first reason is globalization; post Cold War globalization effectively created a massive global labor pool. Corporations gained unprecedented ability to move production to lower-wage countries, intensifying competition for jobs. This exerted significant downward pressure on wages for less-skilled workers in wealthier nations and limited wage growth in developing ones, mirroring historical labor surpluses but on an international scale.

Next is the emergence of Neoliberal Ideology which gained dominance from the 1970s and accelerated after the Cold War. It drove policy shifts that actively reversed the mid-20th century’s more equitable trends. Widespread deregulation (especially finance), privatization, steep cuts to top income and capital gains taxes, and reduced social programs disproportionately benefited capital owners and top earners, dramatically widening the wealth gap.

Then, the fall of the Soviet Union around 1989 removed a major ideological competitor and the perceived “threat of revolution” that had previously encouraged Western elites to accept higher taxes and stronger social safety nets. With this pressure gone, the perceived need for broad equity diminished, and the event was often interpreted as a victory for unregulated markets, further marginalizing calls for redistribution.

Finally, skyrocketing wealth concentration at the top translated into disproportionate political influence through lobbying, campaign finance, and other forms of “crony capitalism.” This created a feedback loop where political systems became more responsive to elite interests, enacting policies (like further tax advantages or deregulation) that cemented and exacerbated inequality, often accompanied by cultural narratives justifying vast wealth disparities.

Rise of Wealth Inequality in India

India is one of the most unequal nations in the entire world; the top 10% of the nation holds 77% of the nation’s wealth, and approximately 70 millionaires are produced every day. The Ambani family’s worth is more than 10% of India’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). India ranks 3rd in the world for number of billionaires while it ranks 141st in the world in terms of its per-capita income⁸.

This concentration of wealth happened relatively quickly after India became independent of its colonial master.

With the advent of economic reforms of the 1990s that enabled globalization, coupled with crony capitalism fueled by general indifference to corruption, it became easy for the richest to become richer and pass their accumulated wealth down the generations.

Lack of basic rights, including lack of labour laws (and the corresponding lack of a minimum wage, working hours and the presence of large wage gaps), lingering casteism, gender inequality, and most importantly, lack of adequately operational public facilities such as education and healthcare crippled the prospects/opportunities of the have-nots and not-so inadvertently pushed them into cycles of poverty and exploitation.

The submission of a common man to authority perpetuated from the colonial times also seemed to ensure that resentment would not turn into upheaval or protests.

This vicious cycle of the rich exploiting the poor and disproportionately reaping the benefits of their work went on while the destitute’s ability to voice their issues was never given. Arguably, this cycle continues till this day.

According to the World Inequality Lab in their 2024 report on India formulated by a group of economists including the renowned French economist Thomas Piketty, the inequality in India today is worse than it was during the colonial times.

The Human Rights Cost of Wealth Inequality

Historical, as well as the contemporary experiences suggest a high correlation between wealth inequality and mass oppression & exploitation.

The Russian Revolution (1917)

The extreme wealth inequality of Tsarist Russia, where a tiny aristocracy controlled vast land and resources while millions of peasants lived in deep poverty and land hunger, was itself a foundation for human rights violations. This economic disparity denied the majority the fundamental right to an adequate standard of living, security, and opportunity. Peasants and workers endured exploitative conditions, near-starvation, and lack of basic dignity, often with no legal recourse. Furthermore, the Tsarist state violently suppressed any attempts by the impoverished masses to demand better conditions or political voice, infringing on rights to assembly, speech, and life to maintain the unequal status quo.

The revolution, aimed at rectifying this inequality, led to its own wave of severe human rights abuses, often justified by class warfare. The Bolsheviks targeted the former elites (aristocracy, bourgeoisie, wealthier peasants or ‘kulaks’) for expropriation, persecution, imprisonment, and execution during the Red Terror and subsequent collectivization drives, violating rights to property, due process, and life based on economic status. Forced grain requisitioning from peasants to feed cities and the army contributed to devastating famines, violating the right to food and life for millions, demonstrating how the violent struggle over wealth distribution resulted in catastrophic human costs.

The Chinese Revolution that occurred in 1949 also had a stark resemblance to the way events unfolded in both the Russian Revolution as well as the French Revolution.

French Revolution (1789-1799)

Pre-revolutionary France was defined by stark inequality, with the privileged First (Clergy) and Second (Nobility) Estates hoarding land and wealth while evading most taxes. This left the Third Estate, comprising nearly everyone else (98% of population), shouldering the nation’s financial burden through oppressive taxes and feudal dues. This crushing economic disparity frequently pushed peasants and urban workers into destitution, violating their fundamental rights to an adequate standard of living and economic security, further compounded by food shortages and biased local justice under seigneurial courts.

Politically voiceless due to an unfair voting system in the Estates-General, and facing rigid social immobility determined by birth, the Third Estate’s grievances festered, contrasting sharply with emerging Enlightenment ideals of popular sovereignty and individual rights.

The combination of economic deprivation, legal inequality, and political impotence created an explosive resentment. The French Revolution, therefore, erupted as a direct and violent rejection of this deeply unequal system, driven by a demand for the “Liberty, Equality, Fraternity” that had been systematically denied to the vast majority.⁹

Assassination of the former UHC CEO Brian Thompson - USA (2024)

The public reaction following the murder of UnitedHealthCare CEO Brian Thompson in late 2024 provides a disturbing glimpse into a contemporary opinion which bears stark resemblance to the French Revolution.

While violence itself is abhorrent, the widespread online commentary featuring memes, dark humor, and even significant celebrations¹⁰ among some segments of the public cannot be dismissed solely as callousness. It reflects a deep wellspring of anger and frustration directed towards perceived corporate greed, the immense cost of healthcare in the US, and the vast disparities between executive compensation and the struggles of ordinary people trying to afford essential medical care.

When millions feel that their right to health is compromised by a system that generates enormous profits and lavish executive rewards while they face crippling medical debt or forgo necessary treatment, figures perceived as embodying that system can become targets of intense public animosity.

This doesn’t excuse violence, but it highlights how profound economic disparities can erode empathy and social cohesion, leading people to feel alienated from, and even hostile towards, those at the top of the economic ladder.

It underscores how systemic inequality, by denying essential rights and creating widespread economic precarity, can foster a climate of deep-seated resentment that, if unaddressed, risks further social fracture and instability, ultimately impacting the security and rights of everyone.

Lack of Adequate Education and Healthcare in India Today

There exists a stark divide between well-funded private healthcare and education accessible to the wealthy and severely under-resourced public systems available to the poor in India.

Poor families may face preventable deaths or lifelong health issues due to their inability to afford treatment, while low-quality education received in public schools limit opportunities for children from disadvantaged backgrounds, trapping them in poverty.

Only 50% of students in grade 5 are able to read text from grade 2¹¹. A whopping 72% of students across India are enrolled in such government schools. The ASER 2024 report suggests that this learning gap widens each year, affecting students even in Class 8.

While there have been a lot of government schools built across the country to facilitate early-stage education of the impoverished, the schools themselves are highly ineffective in educating students adequately and are widely considered to be a failure. They are so ineffective that low-income families tend to send their kids to private institutions by spending a large portion of their income¹². This can be attributed to low concurrent governmental investment in education that leads to low quality of teachers (due to very low pay), lack of basic amenities like fans & lighting and lack of learning aids such as notebooks, writing instruments, computer facilities, etc.

On the other hand, in the healthcare domain, wealth plays the major role in quality. While the Indian government has made efforts to reduce the financial burden, such as decreasing out-of-pocket expenditure (OOPE) from 74% of total health spending in 2001 to about 50% in 2021, and introducing the PM-JAY scheme offering hospitalisation cover to 500 million people, significant gaps remain. Data shows that 60% of the poorest households (those without vehicles) pay out-of-pocket for hospitalisation, compared to 40% of car-owning households. This persistent reliance on OOPE pushes an estimated 7% of India’s population into poverty each year.

Lacking access to quality health services and effective education, individuals are denied the essential capabilities to improve their circumstances or participate fully in the economy. This ensures that despite overall national economic growth and the creation of immense wealth at the top, the benefits fail to reach the impoverished majority. They remain trapped in a vicious cycle of poor health, limited opportunity, and exploitation, perpetually excluded from the prosperity enjoyed by the privileged few.

Post-Apartheid South Africa

The legacy of Apartheid’s spatial segregation endures, with millions, predominantly Black South Africans, residing in impoverished townships or informal settlements. Lacking the economic means enjoyed by the wealthy minority, they face inadequate access to clean water, sanitation, reliable electricity, and safe housing, constituting an ongoing violation of the rights to adequate housing and basic services. This spatial divide, maintained by vast wealth disparities, keeps essential services and opportunities geographically and economically out of reach for the poor¹³.

Furthermore, the profound inequality in land ownership, a direct result of Apartheid’s dispossession policies, persists due to the economic power of existing landowners and slow reform processes. This denies many rural poor their right to livelihood through farming and perpetuates poverty cycles.

Similarly, South Africa’s two-tiered healthcare and education systems reflect the wealth divide: affluent citizens access high-quality private services, while the majority rely on underfunded, often inadequate public systems. This is very reminiscent of the situation in India.

Finally, extreme economic inequality contributes significantly to South Africa’s high levels of violent crime¹⁴, which disproportionately impacts impoverished communities lacking effective security and policing.

In essence, the deep concentration of wealth in South Africa is a fundamental barrier preventing millions from accessing their basic human needs of shelter, land, health, education, and security, demonstrating how inequality actively perpetuates the violations democracy was intended to overcome.

The Future of our Unequal World

As wealth inequality soars globally, tensions rise.

The preceding cases demonstrate how inequality systematically undermines fundamental human rights—denying adequate living standards, health, education, and opportunity—while fostering exploitation and eroding political voice through concentrated power.

Historical precedents like Russia and France serve as stark reminders that such deep-seated injustice can fuel catastrophic conflict and further human rights abuses, making addressing wealth inequality today a critical human rights imperative.

Mitigating this fast-developing crisis peacefully requires a large shift in the economic, political and social system we inhabit to facilitate adequate redistribution of wealth.

This includes revisiting the tenets of neoliberalism: implementing more progressive taxation on income and wealth, strengthening regulations (particularly in the financial sector) to curb excessive risk-taking and speculation, and bolstering labour rights and minimum wages to ensure workers receive a fairer share of productivity gains.

The higher taxation needs to be routed to public investment in universal services like quality education and healthcare. These are not just social safety nets but essential foundations for equality of opportunity, empowering individuals and breaking intergenerational cycles of poverty. As seen in India and South Africa, neglecting public systems while allowing private alternatives for the rich creates entrenched, two-tiered societies incompatible with human rights principles.

Equally vital is tackling the feedback loop where wealth buys political power. This necessitates robust measures to ensure governmental transparency and accountability. Campaign finance reforms, stricter regulations on lobbying, and decisive action against crony capitalism are essential to disentangle economic power from political decision-making, ensuring policies serve the public interest, not just the wealthiest few.

Ultimately, confronting wealth inequality is about restoring balance – not necessarily aiming for absolute equality, but for a society where obscene wealth concentration does not translate into systemic human rights denials for the majority. It is about building economies and political systems that uphold human dignity and offer genuine opportunity for all, creating a more just, stable, and ultimately more prosperous future for humankind.

Bibliography

1. The Future of Inequality: Abhijit Banerjee (MIT, Professor of Economics)
2. Inequality has grown enormously everywhere: Abhijit Banerjee
3. In Data: Billionaires’ riches surge by trillions, poor left behind: Context by TRF
4. Billionaire Wealth Surged From 2015-2024; And They’re Becoming More Mobile: UBS
5. Are Plagues and Ward the Only Ways to Reduce Inequality?: Walter Scheidel
6. Why Inequality Bothers People More Than Poverty: James Suzman
7. Top 1% Grow Wealth by $42 Trillion in Past Decade, 36 Times More Than Bottom 50%- Oxfam: The Wire
8. A Guide to Statistics on Historical Trends in Income Inequality: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
9. For 97% of human history, equality was the norm, what happened?: Kim Sterelny
10. Unjust Disparities: A Closer Look at Inequality in India.
11. Extreme Inequality In India: Oxfam
12. India’s Income Inequality Worse Than Under British Rule - Report: TIME
13. Only 50% Class 5 students can read Class 2 text, learning gap by Class 3: Report: India Today
14. 669 govt primary schools in Tamil Nadu have less than 10 students - Chennai News: Times of India
15. Families cut food, entertainment expenses to send kids to private schools: Research
16. As police lose war on crime in South Africa, private security companies step in: NPR
17. Inequality in India: A survey of recent trends: United Nations
18. World Inequality Report 2022: Lucas Chancel et. al, World Inequality Lab
19. Income and Wealth Inequality in India from 1922-2023: Nitin Kumar et. al, World Inequality Lab
20. Indian Workers Remain Alive to The Class Struggle Despite Decades of Neoliberal Onslaught: Tanupriya Singh