The Sprit Level: Why More Equal Societies Almost Always Do Better
Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett
Allen Lane
352pp
£20.00

Inequality is killing us. Not just those at the bottom of society, but all of us. This is the argument of Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett’s new book The Sprit Level: Why More Equal Societies Almost Always Do Better. It’s one of those subtitles that is so comprehensive, the main reason for opening the book is to verify the evidence – and this, it turns out, is compelling.

Wilkinson and Pickett examine evidence from 22 of the world’s richest countries, plus 50 states from the US. Across a range of variables the authors demonstrate a clear correlation between the level of income inequality, and the extent of health and social problems (if you enjoy scatter graphs then this is the book for you). They find that, in states and countries where income inequality is greatest, the elements of Cameron’s ‘broken society’ – drug problems, mental illness, obesity, teenage pregnancy and murder rates – are all higher, whilst educational performance, literacy scores and life expectancy are lower. By contrast, more equal countries – Japan or those in Scandinavia for example – are less likely to suffer these ‘social ills’.

Yet, as the authors admit, correlation is not the same as causality. Inequality in rich countries may well correlate with a wide range of health and social problems, but what is the reason for thinking that it is their cause? Wilkinson and Pickett offer a range of arguments here. At one level the argument is logical. It is obvious from flicking through the graphs in The Spirit Level that the same countries tend to do well or badly across a wide range of social outcomes. This, they argue, implies a common underlying cause. At another level, the argument is psychological. One of our most basic needs, they argue, is for status. When we feel our status threatened we experience various common responses. Much of this is down to a hormone called cortisol which floods our system when we are stressed – useful in the short term as we decide to fight or flee, but dangerous for our health in the long term. In this sense, Wilkinson and Pickett’s argument is close to that of Richard Sennett and Michael Marmot (with whom Wilkinson worked) on status and anxiety.

Whilst the statistical evidence for Wilkinson and Pickett’s argument is the most compelling, it is – as John Carey noted in his review – the rarer qualitative research that is most affecting. A working-class man in Rotherham tells of the shame he felt having to sit next to a middle-class woman (“this stuck-up cow, you know, slim, attractive”); how he felt conscious of his weight and started to sweat; how he imagined her thinking, “listen, low-life, don’t even come near me. We pay to get away from scum like you” (pp. 165-166). This, notes Carey, “tells you more about the pain of inequality than any play or novel could.”

The UK does not come out of this book well. Each scatter graph showing international comparisons seems to confirm our unenviable record for inequality and social ills. It is, perhaps, one of Labour’s greatest failings that it has acted as if it is slightly ashamed to create a fairer society. Whilst huge sums of money have gone into the public services and schemes that benefit the worst off, the government – fearing the findings of focus groups or the media, perhaps – have done little to make the case for a fairer society. Without this case, the wealthiest feel little responsibility to take the burden once cutbacks become necessary, and the poorest take the hit.

This book raises more questions than it answers and, as several critics have noted, the policy section at the end is thin. The authors’ approach also raises philosophical questions. First, it focuses on material inequality. Yet, as Amartya Sen noted, any question about equality should be met with the response, “equality of what?” This book is silent about the other forms of inequality – or threats to our equal status – that are not immediately related to material inequalities, such as discrimination based on looks, sexuality, gender, ability or ethnicity. Material inequality is important, but the book has little to say on how these other aspects of inequality affect us.

Ironically, perhaps, my main problem is that the authors do not view equality as important enough. For Wilkinson and Pickett, equality is important as a means. It makes us healthy, happy and wise. Yet it is still instrumental. For the left, a good society should be one in which certain forms of equality are ends in themselves – if they also makes us healthier, then all the better.