Global Divides

Across history, there have been many manifestations of stratification in

different societies. Social stratification is essentially the phenomenon of
segregating, grouping, and ranking people based on differences in class, race,
economic status, and other categories.

Perspectives in Global Stratification

There are various theories which attempt to explain the dynamics and
impacts of stratification among people in the world, especially in the context of their
power to tap on resources and maximize these toward development and toward
having a better quality of life.
Modernization theory is one of the theories that attempts t explain
pathways of development, this theory suggests that all societies undergo a similar
process of evolution – from agricultural, industrial, and urbanized and modern – that
is motivated and catalysed by internal factors. It suggest that more than external
influences, internal processes within states are responsible for social change.
For instance, a well-functioning bureaucracy that will ensure welfare among
citizens is a necessary infrastructure to achieve development. In addition, any
society will progress and poverty will be resolved when these internal sources of
development (education, market-driven economy, and political infrastructures) are
present.
However, there are countries nowadays rich in natural resources, but their
people still experiencing extreme poverty. Amidst the affordances in scientific and
technological advancements that are circulated around the globe, we can see that
some countries remain disadvantaged in terms of digital technology transfer that
they are still left behind economically.
Dependency theory, based primarily on the works of Raul Prebisch and
Hans Singer. Thistheory suggest that countries are either “core” (i.e., develop) or
“peripheral” (i.e., developing) such that resources tend to flow from peripheries to
the core. We can relate this in the theory of world system that composed of
boundaries, structures, member groups, rules of legitimation, and coherence. This
world system is assumed to “comprise a single capitalist world-economy”.

Global Divide
In the contemporary world, the buzz word used to pertain to these
stratifications among nations is the term global divide. However, in the modern
world, how did we reach this point? What do you think so? Let’s find out.
First, Second, and Third Worlds
After World War II, the wartime allies (United States and Soviet Union)
entered a Cold War – a state of political tension and rivalry, from the mid-1940s to
early 1990s. The cold War came forth due to political doubts among wartime allies.
For instance, the US has always been wary of the Soviet Union’s communist
leanings and it has stated its position to contain the latter’s expansion. The Cold
War yielded two chief political factions: the Western Bloc, comprised by the
industrial/capitalist US and North Atlantic (UK, Canada, France, Italy, among others)
and the Eastern Bloc (Albania, Poland, Bulgaria, Romania, Czechoslovakia, Hungary,
and Afghanistan), led by the communist/ socialist Russian Soviet Federative
Socialist Republic. The Western Bloc has been referred to as First World countries,
while the Eastern Bloc has been referred to s Second World countries.
In 1974, Teng Hsiao-Ping, vice primer of the People’s Republic of China,
spoke to the United Nation General Assembly. In his talk, he profoundly noted the
distinction among Three Worlds: “The United States and Soviet Union make up the
First World. The developing countries in Asia, Africa, Latin America and other
regions make up the Third World. The developed countries between the two make
up the Second World.
The Brandt Report
In the 1980s, a comprehensive analysis of global economy was reported by
the Independent Commission on International Development Issues. The commission
was led by Willy Brandt, West German chancellor. This analysis was encapsulated in
Brandt Report.
Briefly, this report categorized countries in the northern hemisphere as
comparatively smaller in population and more economically affluent than countries
in the southern hemisphere – a categorization that gave birth to the Brandt line – an
imaginary line that divides the world into the developed north and the developing
south.
The bottom line of this report was the contention on mutuality – that for both
the northern and southern countries to thrive, global economy must be
restructured, for instance by transferring resources to southern economies, thus
ending poverty. In the early 2000s, another report, The Brandt Equation, was
prepared by James Bernard Quilligan, describing the new global economy as facing
“financial contagion”, and requiring “major international relief program” (Quilligan,
2010).

Global North and Global South

A division based only loosely on geography (the line is approximately 30°
North latitude) and more on the degree of development – the Global North includes
Australia & New Zealand, some distinguish the “Global East” these terms
increasingly replace First World, Soviet bloc and Third World, which have lost favor
since the fall of Communism. The Global South has great diversity in size, form of
government and level of economic development (e.g., Qatar), but generally former
Global North colonies, typically part of a “zone of turmoil”. While democracy has
been spreading, the countries typically have more fragile institutions and greater
risks of tyranny and instability.
Global Inequalities
Countries are classified in terms of social, economic, and political structures.
The Human Development Index (HDI) is the instrument used in classifying countries,
Countries are ranked on placed into one of four groups (each group has 49
countries*):
1. Very High Human Development
2. High Human Development
3. Medium Human Development
4. Low Human Development
***Some countries are not ranked because of a lack of data
Starting in 2010, the Human Development Report the HDI now combines three
dimensions:
1. A long and healthy life: Life expectancy at birth
2. Education index: Mean years of schooling and Expected years of
schooling
 3. A decent standard of living: Gross National Income per capita
In classifying countries, the current system uses the following terms:
1. More Developed Countries (MDCs)
 Richest of industrialized nations, high quality of life, good health care,
high life expectancy, highly educated population
 High gross domestic product (GDP) per capita
2. Less Developed Countries (LDCs)
 A developing country, also called a less-developed country, is a
nation with a lower standard of living, underdeveloped industrial base,
and low Human Development Index (HDI) relative to other countries
 There is a strong association between low income and high population
growth
People have lower life expectancy, less education, and less money
(income
3. Least Developed Countries (LLDCs)
 Exhibits the lowest indicators of socioeconomic development, with the
lowest Human Development Index ratings of all countries in the world
 A country is classified as a Least Developed Country if it meets these
criteria:
1. Extreme Poverty
2. Extremely poor human resource weaknesses
(nutrition, health, education and adult literacy)
3. Economic vulnerability (based on instability of agricultural
production, instability of exports of goods and services, economic
importance of non-traditional activities, merchandise export
concentration, handicap of economic smallness, and the percentage of
population displaced by natural disasters)
4. Suffer conditions of ongoing and widespread conflict
(including civil war or ethnic clashes), extensive political corruption,
and lack political and social stability
5. The form of government in such countries is often authoritarian
in nature, and may comprise a dictatorship, warlordism, or
a kleptocracy

One result of the Global Village has been the increasing gap between rich and
poor both on a local and global scale, wealthy countries are concentrated in one
part of the world, while poor countries seem to be concentrated in another – WHY IS
THIS SO? Some of the poorest countries have not been able to take advantage of
new communications technologies to be competitive. According the UN Human
Development Report (1996): the richest 20% of countries controlled 70% of the
global income, by 1993, they controlled 85%. The share of the poorest 20% of the
world’s people had decreased from 2.3% to 1.4%, the shift towards a global world
economy threatens to widen this gap.
The 20% that owns almost 85% of the world’s wealth live almost entirely in
the industrialized nations in the northern hemisphere (in addition to Australia and
New Zealand) while the poorest 20% of people in the world are located in the
southern hemisphere. The Northern countries have the greatest wealth, highest
standard of living, and the greatest industrial development – but the lowest
population. The southern countries have the bulk of the world’s population, but less
of the wealth, low standard of living, and far less industrial development.
The Global South is a changing concept. While for the most part or the
modern world the Global South has been associated to poverty and dependency,
some of these countries are gaining momentum toward achieving their economic
and political goals. There is a good deal to learn about the experiences of the Global
South, especially about the issues they face and the struggles that their people are
going through. But at the same time, there is also plenty to learn about how
collective action and people's empowerment in these locales are paving way for
progress. Most essentially, the phenomenon of the Global South encourages us to
reflect on the affordances and the challenges that globalization poses for people
across economic strata.