There can be no peace in an inequal world? 不平等是否就无法和平共处？ ### The case for “No, inequality destroys peace” - **Social unrest is often rooted in inequality.** When people feel excluded or oppressed, peace breaks down. Look at revolutions throughout history—from the French Revolution to recent protests like Black Lives Matter or mass movements in the Global South. These aren’t just cries for peace—they’re cries for justice. - **Inequality breeds resentment and conflict.** As psychologist John Rawls argues, fairness is central to a stable society. If people see institutions as rigged or fundamentally unfair, trust breaks down. - **Even if violence is absent, peace without justice is fragile.** A society where a wealthy elite lives peacefully while the poor struggle to survive may look “stable” but lacks true peace. Philosopher Johan Galtung calls this _structural violence_—suffering caused by systemic inequality, not direct violence. ### The counterpoint: “Some inequality, maybe, but peace is still possible” - **Inequality is inevitable—but what kind?** Some argue that _differences in wealth or skill_ don’t automatically lead to conflict _if_ basic needs, dignity, and rights are respected. Scandinavian countries, for example, have inequality but high levels of social trust and peace due to strong safety nets. - **Cultural and ideological diversity exists without conflict.** Differences don’t always have to divide. Through tolerance, inclusive governance, and empathy, people can coexist even across inequality—especially when upward mobility or solidarity is possible. - **Peace as a process, not a state.** Some peacebuilding theorists argue that the presence of inequality doesn’t mean peace is impossible—it just means peace requires _constant effort_: redistribution, dialogue, reform. 和平不是静止的状态，而是一种不断努力去理解和照顾彼此的过程。 True peace requires confronting inequality—not pretending it doesn’t matter.