John Stuart Mill On Inequality

Inequality, which can be social, political, and/or economic, usually defines how people are different within and between societies. Inequality in an individual difference within a country but it is also seen between countries when on region of the world may be at more of an advantage than other countries. Most of the readings and discussions that we have had so far in class have been bases on inequality due to differences in class, or status, and political views, which ultimately come from differences in wages and salaries. These issues of inequality are explored through classical and neoclassical economics, Social Darwinism, Marxism, and colonialism, which will all be discussed throughout this reflection.
Classical and neoclassical economics,

He agrees that there is happiness and “reverse happiness, which he refers to as pain, and that these feelings drive people to act in their self-interested. He states that the authority is in place to protect the citizens from each other, but not to intervene in the citizens’ day-to-day life. In other words, inequality of rights is there to protect the people and remind them control their feelings. On the economic side of this, Mill believed that capitalism was soon going to evolve into cooperativism, in which people would work together to make their goals an interest of the whole society, thus creating more

The brain evolves as it is influenced by society to always do better and compete with everyone to achieve the best and overcome inequality. They discuss Darwinism on a societal level as well as an international level. An example of this is when they talk about modernization, which they describe as: “if you want to develop, be like us (the West)” (Peet and Hatwick, p.120). This is why there is such a gap in inequality; the first world countries, such as countries in the west think they know, and are, the best, therefore, everyone should be equal to them. But in actual fact, it is countries like these that make sure that inequality works in their favor and that there is always the hegemonic state and those who are dependent. They go on to talk about how naturalism, in which they refer it to be the “ability to develop earlier and faster than others because of natural superiority” (Peet and Hartwick, p.120). I do not agree that these are the actual definitions, but, however, these statements depict the reality of how things work today; of how the theories are interpreted and