In 2013, Thomas Piketty dropped a bomb into the polite world of economics. His book, Capital in the Twenty-First Century, showed that inequality is not an accident of policy or a passing phase of development: it is a structural feature of capitalism itself. And it argued this not on the basis of theory, but on two centuries of data, painstakingly compiled from tax records, national accounts and inheritance registers.
His central argument is that when people can earn more from investments than from labour, wealth accumulates faster than incomes rise. Those who already own assets grow richer, while those who rely on wages fall behind. So, over time, inequality becomes self-perpetuating.
This was not a Marxist argument about exploitation. It was a statistical description of what capitalism does when left to its own devices. Piketty’s conclusion was unambiguous: without deliberate political intervention through progressive taxation, redistribution, and public investment, inequality will spiral until it undermines democracy itself.
The empirical revolution
Before Piketty, inequality was treated as a moral or political question, not an empirical one. Economists assured us that as countries grew richer, inequality would first rise and then fall. Piketty demolished that myth.
His historical data showed that the post-war reduction in inequality was exceptional, not normal. It had occurred only under the extraordinary conditions of World War II, the reconstruction that followed, an era of high inflation, and deliberate redistribution policies. As he showed, since the 1980s, as those policies have been reversed, inequality has returned to nineteenth-century levels.
The lesson is clear: left to its own devices, capitalism does not deliver equality. It concentrates wealth.
The politics of the return
Piketty’s suggestion is that capital begets capital, wealth generates income, and income buys influence. Those with wealth accumulate not only assets but also power over politics, the media, and public discourse.
The wealthy then use their power to reduce taxes, weaken regulation, suppress unions, and shape ideology. They fund think tanks and media outlets that promote the policies that entrench their dominance.
In other words, inequality is not only the outcome of markets; it is the design of politics.
The myth of merit
One of Piketty’s most devastating insights was to show how inequality hides behind moral language. Today’s elite like to claim that their wealth reflects talent and hard work. But the data says otherwise. Inherited wealth is once again the dominant factor determining life chances. When wealth reproduces itself through inheritance rather than innovation, societies ossify. Social mobility collapses. Democracy becomes plutocracy.
The international dimension
Piketty’s work also reveals the global dimension of inequality. The same forces that concentrate wealth within nations also concentrate it between them. Capital now flows freely across borders, while labour is constrained (and politicians of the right encourage that constraint). The result is a global system in which wealth accumulates in the financial centres of the rich world – and in the secrecy jurisdictions that serve them – while the developing world is drained of resources and talent.
This is not merely the outcome of market forces. It is the architecture of global capitalism – designed, maintained and defended by those who benefit most from it.
Why policy fails
If Piketty has made the mechanics of inequality so visible, why do governments not act? The answer lies in capture. Politics is increasingly financed by the wealthy. Parties compete for donors, not for voters. The revolving door between finance and government ensures that reform never threatens the system’s foundations.
Even centre-left governments, fearful of market reaction, have accepted the limits set by capital. The result is a politics that talks of fairness while quietly perpetuating inequality.
Piketty’s unfinished agenda
Piketty’s own solutions were moderate but radical in implication. They include:
- Progressive taxation of income, wealth and inheritance, including on a global scale.
- Public registers of ownership to expose hidden wealth and tax evasion.
- Democratic control of capital through co-determination and public investment.
These are not utopian ideas. They are the minimum conditions for democracy to coexist with capitalism. Yet even these proposals are resisted, because they confront the core truth of Piketty’s finding: inequality is not a flaw to be fixed, it is the system working as designed.
What to do
Piketty’s work calls for more than tweaking tax rates. It means acknowledging that inequality is not accidental but structural and therefore requires structural counter-power. That means:
- Delivering tax justice through global coordination, to achieve better taxation of wealth and income, and gains derived from it, the closure of secrecy jurisdictions and an end to the race to the bottom in the taxation of capital.
- Assisting public investment by using greater fiscal capacity to help build collective wealth in housing, education, health and green infrastructure.
- Increasing the democratic and accountable ownership of wealth by expanding cooperative, municipal and public forms of enterprise, to both share and reinvest the returns to capital.
- Creating political reform to break the link between money and politics so that democracy can act on the evidence Piketty has laid bare.
Inference
Piketty confronts us with an uncomfortable truth. Capitalism is not drifting toward inequality by accident; it is propelled there by its own dynamics. Unless we intervene, the concentration of wealth will continue until democracy becomes a façade (if that has not already happened in some places).
Piketty’s data gave empirical shape to what earlier critics like Marx and Galbraith understood intuitively: that unchecked accumulation is incompatible with a just or sustainable society. The question is no longer whether inequality will rise. It will. The question is whether democracy has the courage to stop it.
If we know that capitalism concentrates wealth faster than growth can distribute it, the only real ignorance left is political.
This article is republished from Richard Murphy’s blog. You can find the original, and much more by him here.
More from East Anglia Bylines
