Wright distinguishes between exploitation based on 3 principles; The inverse interdependent principle, the exclusion principle, and the appropriation principle. The first of these are characteristics of oppression, however only all three define exploitation. Exploiters depend on the exploited for their own gains, and the exploited often depend on the exploiters for their livelihood. Oppressors on the other hand are indifferent or even hostile towards the oppressed. An example of this, used in Wrights text is the difference between South Africa and North America, wherein North America indigenous people were oppressed and genocide was used to control resistance, However in South Africa there was European settlers who relied on African labour, …show more content…
It does this by providing an option to leave work that was unsuitable for different reasons, meaning people could participate in socially productive activity (not market based) such as caregiving labour or activities of choice without the formation of an employment relation. This reconstructs the balance of power in class relations, between labour and capital, raises shared strength of workers, new systems of cooperation and closer collaboration, by providing workers with bargaining power. Some of the possible obstacles in an Australian context could include; economic funding and long term stability, and a negative attitude from Australians toward welfare and paternalism/“nanny state” with a preference towards a belief that everyone is given a “fair go” and has their own agency to succeed. In some ways, this is fair as it is equal and aiming to fix injustice, however it may not provide equity as it would still maintain a class system if some earn significantly more than others and UBI is a small portion of that. However, this will still raise the quality of life of those at the bottom significantly, and this is important when aiming to give everyone the same chance to …show more content…
As one of the most equitable and egalitarian countries with high income parity, minor poverty levels, free education and healthcare, rights and social freedoms and traditional custom of humanitarianism the Danish can be seen as a very liberal people. However, Denmark is tough on immigration and those who do it. This is seen in the Danish attitudes towards Muslim immigrants and refugees (less than 5% of pop.). The general Danish attitude is that Muslims are at a “lower stage of civilisation” and are a threat which has lead to some controversial policies such as drastically reducing benefits to refugees, refusing to take the 1000 refugees assigned to them, not allowing asylum seekers to live anywhere but refugee centres, laws introduced to strip search refugees and take any valuable items or cash, and heightening the difficulty to gain permanent residence. This makes it hard to people new to Denmark who often do not easily learn Danish or join the workforce, relying only on welfare and end up in “ghettos” which are shut off from the rest of Danish society. This is evidence of the “harsh” side of Danish society. this contrast between ‘outsiders’ and ‘nationals’ allows the Danish system to help some and make it very difficult for others, making Denmark both the most racist and most