introduction: the killing fields of inequality

Abstract

Göran Therborn’s recent book The Killing Fields of Inequality is an opportunity for political scientists to reconnect with a thematic that has for long been the pre-occupation of sociologists: inequality. The killing fields to which Therborn refers in the title of his book are inequalities of wealth, health, education, dignity, and so on. These inequalities are killing fields because they result in millions of premature deaths every year, not just in the Third World, but also in North America and Europe. And even when people survive inequality, their lives are limited by the inequalities they face. In The Killing Fields, Therborn examines the different ‘fields’ of inequality, examining the different ways in which inequality works, for instance through what he terms ‘distanciation’, and he identifies the critical battlefields on which the struggle against inequality has to take place. In their reviews of Therborn’s book, Walden Bello, Joohee Lee and Shujiro Yazawa take a critical look at the different aspects of Therborn’s argument, including the role of the middle classes, the concept of distanciation and Therborn’s use of Amartya Sen’s capability approach.

Book reviewed: The Killing Fields of Inequality, Göran Therborn (Cambridge: Polity, 2013), 180 pp., ISBN: 978-0745662596

Inequality kills, and it kills in many different ways. Inequalities of wealth, health, education, dignity, and so on and so forth – these are the killing fields to which Göran Therborn refers in the title of his book The Killing Fields of Inequality. These inequalities are killing fields because they result in millions of premature deaths every year, not just in the Third World, but also in North America and Europe, Japan and elsewhere. And even when people survive inequality, their lives are limited by the inequalities they face. In The Killing Fields, Therborn – one of the great sociologists and political scientists of our time – examines the different ‘fields’ of inequality, examining the different ways in which inequality works, for instance through what he terms ‘distanciation’, and he identifies the critical battlefields on which the struggle against inequality has to take place. In their reviews of Therborn’s book, Walden Bello, Joohee Lee and Shujiro Yazawa take a critical look at the different aspects of Therborn’s argument, including the role of the middle classes, the concept of distanciation and Therborn’s use of Amartya Sen’s capability approach. Therborn’s work is a welcome opportunity for political science to reconnect with a thematic that has for long been the pre-occupation of sociologists: inequality.