Henry Tam is Visiting Professor at Birkbeck College, University of London. He has written extensively on the subject of democratic citizenship, and actively championed the development of inclusive communities. In this guest blog post he outlines the analysis from his recent book Against Power Inequalities.
If in the land of the blind, the one-eye man is king, then in the realm of trillionaires, even those with merely a millionaire status would languish at the bottom of the heap. Power – visual power, purchasing power, military power – whatever form it takes, is inherently relative. It makes no sense to talk about someone being powerful or not without making a comparison with someone else’s ability to make things happen. And since poverty is in essence about the lack of power, we should never lose sight of the need to combat it by limiting the concentration of power in those who can already pretty much do what they want.
Yet, it is not an uncommon suggestion that people should not worry about what others have got. Perhaps the visibly wretched should be given clothes, shelter and food. But beyond that, we are often told; people should look after their own needs and leave others to get on with their lives. Where they have a common interest in cooperating, they can voluntarily do so; otherwise just let people mind their own business. This sanguine outlook has one critical flaw. It ignores what entrepreneurs have tirelessly demanded as the level playing field, or diplomats have for centuries sought as the balance of power – in short, a power structure where no one has a predominant capacity to subdue, intimidate, marginalise, or take unfair advantage over others.
If we really care about helping the poor, the powerless, all those who are vulnerable to the whims and commands of others, then we need to make sure they can stand up to the powerful. In my new book, Against Power Inequalities, I look back on history and find that over centuries, across the world, a similar pattern emerges with those in powerful positions seeking to strengthen their grip even further by constantly changing the rules in their favour, and progress in making communities more inclusive only achieved when reformists and citizens have managed to redistribute power more fairly. Along the way, there are of course many twists and turns. Some claim to fight for the powerless and end up just grabbing power for themselves. Others express deep concern for the poor while they consolidate economic arrangements which will continue to benefit the rich at the expense of everyone else. But sustained change for the better is possible.
We are not talking about some utopian end point, but a constant effort to moderate excesses. The civil service has now been told that its highest earners should not be earning 20 times or more than the lowest. The same message needs to be repeated for society at large – at present, the top 10% in the UK have 100 times more wealth than the bottom 10%. At the global level, the challenge is even more severe. The richest 1% of adults own 40% of the world’s assets, while the bottom 50% barely own 1% of the world’s wealth.
To adapt the homily about not just giving a hungry man a fish, but teaching him the art of fishing, there is no point in teaching him how to fish if he is unable to stop the multinational fleet of trawlers taking away the entire fish stock.
Henry Tam’s new book, Against Power Inequalities, provides a short guide to the contest for power redistribution across the centuries, and draws out the underlying causes of disempowerment which are still with us today. It is available for free download from the Equality Trust, or from Henry Tam’s own blog Question the Powerful.
The 
I was reminded recently of the 