This article asks how ordinary people in Germany perceive and legitimize economic disparities in an era of rising income inequality. Based on in-depth qualitative interviews with respondents from higher and lower social classes, the paper reconstructs the 'moral economy' that underlies popular views of inequality. While respondents agree with abstract inegalitarian principles-i.e. income differentiation based on merit-they are concerned with specific instances of inequality, especially poverty and wealth. These are criticized because they are seen to imply intolerable deviations, both upwards and downwards, from a way of living presumed as universal, thereby fostering a segregation of life-worlds and social disintegration. Thus, perceptions of injustice do not seem to be based on the existence of income inequality as such, but rather on the view that economic disparities threaten the social bond.

Welfare regimes differ in their impact on social inequality in important ways. While previous research has explored the shape of stratification across nations and citizens' normative attitudes towards inequality, scant attention has been given to citizens' perceptions of actual stratification across welfare regimes. Using the 1999 International Social Survey Programme, we compare perceptions of inequality in Germany, Sweden, and the United States. More specifically, we ask how the stratification reality in each country is assessed by its citizens, whether it meets their stratification aspirations, and whether these perceptions differ systematically both across and within welfare regimes. Our results show that perceptions vary in a clear and meaningful way across countries as well as between different social groups within a given welfare regime. For instance, Americans are more likely to view society as unequal, but only slightly more likely to prefer that extent of inequality. Conversely, the Swedish clearly view their society as more equal than citizens in the United States and Germany, yet not nearly as equal as they would like it to be. Our multivariate results reveal important similarities and differences as well, such as socioeconomic cleavages in the United States, and cleavages between labour market insiders and outsiders in Germany.

No abstract

In a classical typology, Polanyi distinguishes three basic modes of economic integration: competitive market exchange, redistribution and reciprocity. While markets are dominant in modern capitalism, redistribution and reciprocity are—to varying extent—also part of its institutional architecture. Asking whether such institutional differences are mirrored in distinct ‘moral economies’, we investigate ordinary citizens’ support for market competition, redistribution and reciprocity across 14 capitalist economies. Combining data from three comparative surveys, we analyze, first, the extent to which these principles are supported by citizens and whether they cluster into distinct ‘moral economies’; second, whether these norms are anchored in formal institutional settings; and finally, how privileged and disadvantaged groups differ in their support. While support for market competition is strong across countries, it is to varying degrees complemented by support for redistribution and reciprocity. We identify a competition-dominated, an embedded and a strongly embedded moral economy. The interplay of formal institutions and people’s social–structural position partly explains differences in popular support.

No abstract