Introduction
Throughout human history, inequality has been a persistent feature of societies around the world. The gap between rich and poor, powerful and powerless, has ebbed and flowed but never disappeared entirely. In "The Great Leveler," historian Walter Scheidel examines the forces that have reduced inequality at various points in history, coming to a sobering conclusion: the most effective levelers of society have been violent upheavals like wars, revolutions, state collapse, and deadly pandemics.
Scheidel challenges the common notion that democracy and capitalism have been the primary drivers of greater equality. Instead, he argues that peaceful reforms and policy changes have had limited success in significantly reducing inequality compared to the leveling effects of catastrophic events. By analyzing historical data from ancient civilizations through the modern era, Scheidel reveals patterns in how extreme inequality has typically been reversed.
While not advocating for violence as a solution, the book raises important questions about the stubborn persistence of inequality and the difficulty of addressing it through peaceful means alone. Scheidel's sweeping historical perspective provides context for understanding contemporary debates around inequality and considering potential paths forward.
The Origins of Inequality
From Hunter-Gatherers to Farmers
For most of human history, our ancestors lived as nomadic hunter-gatherers in small, egalitarian groups. Resources were typically shared, and there was little accumulation of wealth or social hierarchy. However, the end of the last ice age around 11,700 years ago ushered in a more stable climate that allowed for the development of agriculture and permanent settlements.
This shift to farming and food production marked the beginning of social inequality on a larger scale. As some people began accumulating surplus food and resources, they were able to employ others to work their land. Archaeological evidence from 11,000 years ago shows the first signs of significant differences in household sizes and consumption patterns, indicating a growing divide between rich and poor.
Technological Advances Drive Further Inequality
Even in smaller tribal societies, technological innovations could disrupt egalitarian structures and concentrate power. Scheidel gives the example of the Chumash tribe on the California coast between 500-700 AD. The development of a new type of ocean-going canoe allowed some men to control deep-sea fishing operations. This gave them leverage to dominate land ownership, religious ceremonies, and warfare within the tribe. Other members offered them tribute in exchange for protection and access to resources.
As societies grew more complex, opportunities for inequality multiplied. Those able to accumulate land, resources, and power used their advantage to further increase their wealth and influence relative to others. While the specific mechanisms varied across cultures, the general trend was toward greater stratification and hierarchy.
Land Ownership and the Concentration of Wealth
Early Egalitarian Land Systems
In many early agricultural civilizations, land ownership was initially organized in a relatively egalitarian manner. For instance, in Sumerian society in Mesopotamia around 5,000 years ago, most farmland was divided among extended family groups. Male representatives from each family made decisions about how to divide the profits from farming.
Similar communal land ownership systems were seen in ancient Chinese civilizations 4,000 years ago, as well as in Aztec and Inca societies in the Americas. The idea of private land ownership had not yet taken hold in these cultures.
The Shift Toward Privatization and Inequality
Over time, however, this egalitarian approach to land began to break down in many societies. In Sumeria, religious institutions started buying up land and employing others to farm it. The aristocratic class followed suit, privatizing land that had previously belonged to family groups.
One common pattern was for families to take out high-interest loans, often using their land as collateral. When they couldn't repay, they would be forced to sell their land to creditors, sometimes even becoming debt slaves. This allowed wealthy elites to accumulate more and more property while depriving others of land ownership.
As land became concentrated in fewer hands, those without property had to seek employment from landholders to survive. This created a cycle that increased wealth and power imbalances over time. The privatization and concentration of land ownership became a key driver of rising inequality in many ancient societies.
Inequality in Europe: Collapses and Plagues as Levelers
The Roman Empire's Inequality Peak
The Roman Empire from 200-400 CE represented one of the first clear examples of extreme inequality in European history. Roman society at this time was highly populous, increasingly urbanized, and tremendously wealthy overall. However, the gap between rich and poor was also expanding rapidly.
Political Collapse as an Equalizer
The fall of the Roman Empire actually served to reduce inequality across much of Europe. As political order crumbled, urban centers declined and the established elite lost much of their wealth and privilege. With less wealth being funneled to the top of society, resources became more evenly distributed among the population.
The Return of Inequality in Medieval Europe
As strong political institutions reemerged in medieval Europe, so did high levels of inequality. This peaked during the feudal period from roughly 1000-1300 AD. Land ownership became heavily concentrated among nobles and clergy, who wielded immense power over the peasant majority.
The Black Death's Leveling Effect
The devastation of the Black Death in the 14th century once again served to reduce inequality, albeit through catastrophic means. The plague wiped out a huge portion of Europe's population, with the working classes hit especially hard. This created a labor shortage that drove up wages for surviving workers. Peasants and urban laborers saw their economic power increase relative to landowners and elites, helping to close the inequality gap.
This pattern of inequality rising during times of stability and growth, only to be forcefully reduced by calamitous events, would repeat itself throughout European history. Wars, revolutions, economic collapses, and pandemics consistently served as the most potent forces for leveling society, often in brutal ways.
World War II and Inequality in Japan
Japan's Pre-War Empire and Inequality
In the lead-up to World War II, Imperial Japan was a major world power with significant inequality. By 1938, the wealthiest 1% of the population owned about one-fifth of the nation's wealth. The Japanese Empire stretched across much of East and Southeast Asia, encompassing nearly 500 million people.
The Devastation of War
Japan's defeat in World War II came at an enormous cost. Over 2.5 million Japanese soldiers died, cities were devastated by American bombing campaigns, and atomic weapons were used on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The trauma and destruction of the war reshaped Japanese society.
War's Equalizing Effects
While catastrophic for the nation as a whole, the war had a significant leveling effect on wealth inequality in Japan. The upper class lost over two-thirds of its wealth during the conflict. The share of national wealth held by the top 1% fell from 9.2% to just 1.9%.
Several factors contributed to this equalization:
- War financing measures that disproportionately impacted the wealthy
- Physical destruction of assets owned by elites
- Post-war reforms imposed by American occupiers
Interestingly, this pattern of war reducing inequality was seen in many other combatant nations, including Germany, France, and Great Britain. The mobilization of society for total war, combined with physical and economic destruction, served to compress wealth differences across classes.
The Russian Revolution: Violent Leveling Through Political Upheaval
Inequality in Tsarist Russia
On the eve of the 1917 revolution, Russia remained a deeply unequal society under Tsar Nicholas II. A small nobility and emerging capitalist class controlled most of the nation's wealth and land, while the vast peasant majority lived in poverty. Russia's costly involvement in World War I exacerbated economic hardships and social tensions.
The Bolshevik Revolution
In November 1917, Vladimir Lenin and the Bolsheviks seized power in Petrograd (St. Petersburg), overthrowing the provisional government that had replaced the Tsar earlier that year. The very next day, they passed a sweeping land reform decree.
Radical Redistribution of Wealth and Property
The stated aim of the communist revolution was to abolish private property ownership entirely. Key policies included:
- Redistributing land to peasants for cultivation
- Banning the sale, lease, or rental of land
- Prohibiting the hiring of agricultural labor
- Nationalizing banks and confiscating private accounts
- Seizing property from nobles, clergy, and other wealthy groups
The effects on the upper classes were devastating. An estimated 500,000 landowners and 125,000 affluent families had everything taken from them. Many were killed in the violence of the revolution and subsequent civil war.
While brutal and oppressive in many ways, the Bolshevik takeover did succeed in rapidly leveling wealth inequality in Russia through forceful redistribution. However, new forms of inequality would eventually emerge under Soviet rule.
Somalia: Equality Through State Collapse
The Fall of Siad Barre's Regime
In 1991, the government of Somalia collapsed entirely following the ousting of dictator Mohamed Siad Barre. The country fractured into regions controlled by various warlords, militias, and foreign interventions. A devastating civil war raged for five years.
Poverty Amidst Anarchy
Even after the worst of the fighting subsided, living conditions in Somalia remained extremely poor by global standards. The country consistently ranked at the bottom of poverty and development indices for Arab nations.
An Unexpected Improvement
However, Scheidel argues that the poverty and anarchy of post-collapse Somalia may have actually been an improvement over the previous regime for many citizens. Under Siad Barre, the country's resources were funneled to a small elite while the regime violently suppressed opposition.
After the state's disintegration:
- Overall levels of violence declined (until 2006)
- Basic services were provided by local communities and Islamic courts
- The money extracted by warlords and militias was often less than previous tax burdens
A 2005 study found that some quality of life indicators in Somalia had improved relative to other sub-Saharan African countries, despite the lack of a functional central government.
This counterintuitive case illustrates how even the catastrophic collapse of a state can sometimes serve as a leveling force, reducing extreme inequality by eliminating exploitative power structures. However, the human cost and ongoing instability in Somalia show the immense downsides of such a scenario.
The Limitations of Democracy and Left-Wing Governments
Democracy Is Not a Cure for Inequality
Many in the West have long viewed democracy as the best system for promoting equality and fairness. However, Scheidel argues that the historical evidence does not support this assumption.
A 2010 study by economist Daron Acemoglu and colleagues analyzed 184 democracies between 1960-2010. They found no consistent correlation between democratic governance and greater income equality. Two key reasons were proposed:
- Democracies can be captured by powerful interests, preventing meaningful redistribution.
- The economic growth and liberty fostered by democracy can actually increase inequality if the gains are not evenly distributed.
Left-Wing Governments Have Limited Impact
Even explicitly left-wing governments focused on reducing inequality have struggled to make major progress. A 2016 study of 13 democracies from 1916-2000 found that left-wing rule only marginally reduced the income share of the top 1% compared to right-wing governments.
The Role of Labor Unions
Labor unions have historically been more effective at combating inequality by allowing workers to collectively bargain for better wages and conditions. However, union power tends to be strongest during periods of high inequality. As conditions improve, support for unions often declines, limiting their long-term equalizing effects.
These findings suggest that standard democratic processes and left-leaning policies face significant headwinds in addressing entrenched inequality. More radical changes may be necessary to achieve major reductions in wealth concentration.
Proposed Economic Reforms: Promise and Uncertainty
Atkinson's Comprehensive Plan
In 2015, British economist Anthony Atkinson published a detailed analysis of potential economic reforms to tackle inequality. His proposals included:
- Limiting market power and boosting organized labor
- Increasing taxes on capital gains and high incomes
- Ensuring livable minimum wages
- Introducing a national standard income for every child
The Debate Over Universal Basic Income
In Europe and elsewhere, there is ongoing discussion about implementing a universal basic income (UBI) that would provide a standard payment to all citizens, regardless of employment status. Proponents argue this could reduce poverty and provide a safety net as automation disrupts traditional employment.
Challenges and Unknowns
While these reform ideas are promising, their feasibility and effectiveness remain uncertain. Key challenges include:
- The potentially high costs of implementation
- Pressure from globalization and international competition
- Difficulty passing major reforms through political systems
Even if enacted, it's unclear how much these policies would reduce inequality. Atkinson estimated his proposals could bring UK inequality closer to Swedish levels, but this would still fall short of the compression seen after major wars or revolutions.
The Need for Real-World Testing
Ultimately, the impact of these reform proposals won't be known until they are implemented and studied in real-world conditions. Policymakers and citizens will need to weigh the potential benefits against the costs and disruptions involved in such sweeping changes.
Final Thoughts: The Challenge of Peaceful Leveling
Walter Scheidel's sweeping historical analysis in "The Great Leveler" presents a sobering picture of the forces that have most effectively reduced inequality throughout human history. Time and again, it has been catastrophic events like wars, revolutions, state collapses, and pandemics that have compressed wealth differences and reset the economic playing field.
This pattern poses difficult questions for those seeking to address inequality in the modern world:
How can extreme inequality be meaningfully reduced without relying on violent upheaval or disaster?
Are incremental reforms and democratic processes capable of overcoming the forces that drive wealth concentration?
What level of inequality should societies tolerate to avoid the instability that often precedes major leveling events?
Scheidel does not provide easy answers to these dilemmas. His work suggests that the task of creating a more equal society through peaceful means is far more challenging than many assume. The entrenched power of elites, the complexities of globalized economies, and the tendency of stable societies to generate greater inequality all work against equalizing forces.
However, the book should not necessarily be read as an argument for fatalism or inaction. By understanding the historical dynamics that have shaped inequality, we may be better equipped to design policies and systems that can achieve more gradual leveling without catastrophic costs. Some potential directions include:
- Strengthening democratic institutions to be more resistant to capture by wealthy interests
- Implementing more aggressive redistributive policies like wealth taxes or universal basic income
- Focusing on equalizing access to education, healthcare, and other foundations of opportunity
- Fostering a cultural shift that places greater value on economic fairness and shared prosperity
While these approaches may not match the dramatic leveling seen after major conflicts or collapses, they offer the possibility of more sustainable and humane paths toward reducing inequality. The challenge for current and future generations is to find ways to create more equitable societies without relying on the violent disruptions that have driven change in the past.
Ultimately, "The Great Leveler" serves as both a warning about the dangers of extreme inequality and a call to action. It suggests that if peaceful reforms fail to adequately address wealth concentration, societies may face heightened risks of the very calamities that have leveled inequality in the past. By grappling honestly with this history, we can work toward forging new solutions for creating fairer, more stable societies in the 21st century and beyond.