Social Class and Inequality in the Neoliberal Era

This mini-series is a long-form blog based on a chapter written for an edited book: Diversity and Welfare. Original citation: Beck, D., & Gwilym, H. (2024). Neoliberalism, division and austerity: precarity and hunger in the UK. In Gregory, Lee, and Steve Iafrati (eds) Diversity and Welfare Provision (pp. 60-77). Policy Press.

You’ll find access to all parts of this blog here.

Part 2: Social Class and Inequality in the Neoliberal Era

In the previous blog post, we explored the rise of neoliberalism and its impact on society. This post delves deeper into how neoliberal policies have reshaped social class and increased inequality. By examining theoretical frameworks such as Bourdieu's habitus and Standing's precariat, we can better understand the dynamics of class inequality in the neoliberal era.

Bourdieusian Habitus

Pierre Bourdieu's concept of habitus is essential for understanding class inequality. Habitus refers to the deeply ingrained habits, skills, and dispositions that individuals acquire through their life experiences. These dispositions are shaped by social structures and cultural norms, influencing how individuals perceive and respond to the world around them. Bourdieu identifies three forms of capital that contribute to social inequality:

• Economic Capital: Financial resources and assets that individuals possess.

• Cultural Capital: Knowledge, education, and cultural assets that individuals acquire.

• Social Capital: Networks and connections that individuals can leverage for social and economic benefits.

These forms of capital are distributed unequally across different social classes, perpetuating class divisions and inequality. For example, individuals from wealthier backgrounds are more likely to have access to better education and cultural resources, which in turn enhance their social and economic opportunities.

Economic, Cultural, and Social Capitals: The distribution of economic, cultural, and social capitals plays a crucial role in shaping class inequality. Neoliberal policies have exacerbated these inequalities by promoting individualism and market-driven solutions. Key points include:

• Economic Capital: Neoliberalism has led to increased concentration of wealth among the richest individuals and corporations, widening the gap between the rich and the poor.

• Cultural Capital: Access to education and cultural resources has become increasingly unequal, with those from disadvantaged backgrounds facing barriers to educational attainment and cultural participation.

• Social Capital: The erosion of community bonds and collective identities has weakened social networks, making it harder for individuals from lower social classes to access social and economic opportunities.

Neoliberalism and Class

Neoliberal policies have reshaped class structures and increased inequality. The emphasis on free markets and competition has led to significant economic growth, but the benefits of this growth have not been evenly distributed. For example, we have seen a significant widening of social inequalities where the gap between the rich and the poor has widened, with wealth increasingly concentrated in the hands of a few (think the rise of the millionaires and how they are vastly differnt from billionaires). for others ther has been a significant rise in precarious employment practices driven by policies set in motion be Thatcher and her approach to deregulation and the weakening of trade unions. Both of which have resulted in more precarious employment conditions, with many workers facing job insecurity and low wages. This has, inevitably affetced social mobility with neoliberalism reshaping class distinctions and promoted individualism over collective identity, making it harder for individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds to achieve upward social mobility.

As I identified in the previous blog, Guy Standing’s work on the Precariat introduces the concept of the precariat as a new social class characterised by insecurity and lack of employment-based identity. The precariat is distinguished by precarious work conditions, lack of job security, and limited access to social protections. They are also marked by unstable employment, low wages, and limited access to social benefits and protections. All of these too are driven by neoliberal policies which have significantly contributed to the rise of the precariat by prioritising flexibility and competitiveness over stability and security (all of which benefit the employer…not the employee). Obvioulsy, then, the precariat faces significant challenges, including economic insecurity, social exclusion, and lack of political representation, not to mention hightened poverty.

Neoliberalism and Social Division

As we argued in the main chapter this blog is based on, neoliberalism has exacerbated social divisions by promoting individualism and undermining collective identities. The emphasis on personal responsibility and self-reliance has led to a decline in social solidarity and a weakening of community bonds and lowers social solidarity.

As we can see, neoliberalism has fundamentally reshaped social class and increased inequality in the UK. The principles of free markets, minimal state intervention, and individual responsibility have led to widening economic disparities, precarious employment conditions, and weakened social solidarity. Understanding the dynamics of class inequality in the neoliberal era is crucial for advocating for policies that promote social justice and reduce inequality.

In the next blog post, we will explore the impact of austerity measures on society, focusing on the rise of food insecurity and the role of food banks. By examining the consequences of austerity, we can better understand the need for comprehensive policy changes to address these issues.

Once again - Thanks for reading and supporting this!