Thomas Piketty’s relevance for the study of education: reflections on the political economy of education
Abstract
Beginning in the summer of 2008, the global financial crisis destroyed wealth across the world. Emanating from the world’s financial capital in New York City, as the financial institutions Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers went bankrupt, the crisis rapidly influenced the financial well being and prosperity of people, businesses, and governments across the Americas, Asia, Africa, and Europe. The crisis exposed the harsh reality behind the rapid economic growth and wealth creation of the new millennium – it was predicated on levels of inequality unseen since the Great Depression.
Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the Twenty-First Century documents this landscape of rising wealth inequality in the twenty-first century. While inequality is not a new topic, the book’s unparalleled success came at a moment of political salience when inequality was at the forefront of academic conversations, political rhetoric, and social movement demands. Piketty’s arguments powerfully entered the public dialogue and served to reinforce the growing consensus that our global economic system is unjust and has led to unprecedented returns on wealth for a few and devastating, precarious conditions for most of the world’s population.
Although the question of inequality is not a new topic in the field of education, Piketty’s economic treatise is an opportunity to revisit the question of education’s role in producing a more equal society in the twenty-first century. According to Piketty, the diffusion of knowledge and skills through education is an important ‘force for convergence’, but cannot overcome the powerful forces of divergence within capitalism that propel increasing inequality. This special issue is comprised of scholars who examine if, how, and to what extent Piketty’s analysis is useful for understanding contemporary relationships between inequality and educational policy and practice. The authors draw on, expand, reject, and/or critique Piketty’s arguments and proposals in light of empirical findings in their own research.
Abstract
Beginning in the summer of 2008, the global financial crisis destroyed wealth across the world. Emanating from the world’s financial capital in New York City, as the financial institutions Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers went bankrupt, the crisis rapidly influenced the financial well being and prosperity of people, businesses, and governments across the Americas, Asia, Africa, and Europe. The crisis exposed the harsh reality behind the rapid economic growth and wealth creation of the new millennium – it was predicated on levels of inequality unseen since the Great Depression.
Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the Twenty-First Century documents this landscape of rising wealth inequality in the twenty-first century. While inequality is not a new topic, the book’s unparalleled success came at a moment of political salience when inequality was at the forefront of academic conversations, political rhetoric, and social movement demands. Piketty’s arguments powerfully entered the public dialogue and served to reinforce the growing consensus that our global economic system is unjust and has led to unprecedented returns on wealth for a few and devastating, precarious conditions for most of the world’s population.
Although the question of inequality is not a new topic in the field of education, Piketty’s economic treatise is an opportunity to revisit the question of education’s role in producing a more equal society in the twenty-first century. According to Piketty, the diffusion of knowledge and skills through education is an important ‘force for convergence’, but cannot overcome the powerful forces of divergence within capitalism that propel increasing inequality. This special issue is comprised of scholars who examine if, how, and to what extent Piketty’s analysis is useful for understanding contemporary relationships between inequality and educational policy and practice. The authors draw on, expand, reject, and/or critique Piketty’s arguments and proposals in light of empirical findings in their own research.
