Revisiting the Self-Help Housing debate: Perception of Self-Help Housing by the beneficiaries of South African low-cost housing

2.4: Inequalities

2.4.1 Definitions and overview

Inequality is the reality that our communities, cities, countries, world face. In relation to the housing issue, it is the situation that explains why some households are living in poor housing conditions while others live in good housing conditions. As Okun (1980: 15) asserts, «inequality is very easy to recognize». Inequality may be generally understood as the differences existing between individuals, cities, communities, countries, etc. It is not only a local reality but also a global phenomenon. It may be observed that some differences existing among individuals are natural (sex, race, etc) and some others are intentionally created in order to dominate or to exclude other individuals from the economic and political life of the society. The vibrant example may be found in South Africa where apartheid was institutionalized as a political system for the purpose of dominating Black people. My concern in discussing this issue is to see how inequalities between individuals may stimulate the practice of SHH.

Inequality is a controversial reality. Indeed, there are two main positions related to this matter. On the one hand, inequality or differences between individuals are necessary and inevitable. As Hurst (1995) argues, society needs sometimes certain kinds of tasks which are useful for the advancement or progress of society. So, the society should encourage those who may perform those special tasks. In this sense, the attempt to eradicate inequalities between individuals living in the society may jeopardize the advancement or the progress of the society. This is a modern explanation of inequality, developed through the theory of functionalism or stratification. This argument is supported by Tawney (1980) when he argues that the United States of America (USA) is economically the super power in the world because of encouraging people with specialized tasks. Furthermore, Nozick (1974) argues that the attempt by a State to reduce or to eradicate inequalities between individuals cannot be justified morally. In other words, according to Nozick, the State should not intervene to improve housing conditions of poor households in taxing rich people for example. Nozick draws this conclusion from his theory of entitlement^13(*) which explains how individuals can fairly acquire their properties.

On the other hand some theorists argue that social, political and economic inequalities are not created by differences in individual talents. These are especially the results of an unfair system. As Hurst (1995: 4) argues, «it is the characteristics of the political economy, and the firms and labour market within it, that are primary determinants of differences in income and wealth». In this sense, neo-liberalism which stresses the market as the determinant element may be one of the causes of economic inequalities. Referring to this group of theorists who argue that inequalities are not a result of natural facts but of structures created by individuals for dominating or controlling other individuals, inequalities should be undesirable and therefore the State must seek to reduce or to eradicate them. In South Africa for example, where the level of inequality is high, the post-apartheid government has sought to combat this issue through the implementation of the RDP programme. In sum, for proponents of neo-liberalism, inequality is essential and useful for the progress of society and for others inequality is a consequence of an unjust system: thus, the State should combat it.

Tawney (1980) defines a framework in which we need to seek a desirable equality which in fact does not endanger the progress of society. Besides, he also describes unjustifiable inequalities, created by social, political and economic environment and which need to be reduced or eradicated. He proposes the focus on our common humanity as a solution to redress inequalities instead of emphasizing factors which divide individuals such as class, skills, etc. The author understands the desirable equality not as «equality of capacity or attainment, but of circumstances, institutions and manner of life». In addition, the undesirable and unjustifiable inequality «is not inequality of personal gifts, but of the social and economic environment». The ideal of society would be that «social institutions - property rights, and the organization of industry, and the system of public health and education - should be planned, as far as is possible, to emphasize and strengthen, not the class differences which divide, but the common humanity which unites them» (Tawney, 1980: 12).

It may be observed that inequality is a complex reality as it is defended by some theorists as necessary for the progress of society and seen by others as a result of unfair structure. This unfair structure aims at favouring some individuals or a group of individuals while leaving others in miserable situations. In addition, the complexity of inequality may also be explained by the fact that it is not only a local reality but also a global phenomenon which should in fact concern humanity in general. The following section will seek to understand inequality at the global level.

* ¹³ In his theory of entitlement, Nozick explains how individual may obtain his property fairly. The first principle argues that a given property may be acquired if it was not owned before. The second principle starts that individual may also acquire a property through exchange. The third and last principle announces that only through the first and the second principles an individual may fairly obtain a property. These principles constitute the bases of libertarianism, a movement of thought of which Nozick is the main proponent (See Robert Nozick, quoted in Pojman and Westmoreland, 1997: 257).