Illustration: Liu Rui

Social polarization is the crucial barrier for China's development. But it is contra-factual to treat social polarization in China as the result of the role of the market economy in the opening-up process.

The wealth gap in China today has three causes. First, market economy policies permit those who contribute more to the society to get rich first, which is in accordance with the socialist principle of "more pay for more work."

This kind of gap is natural and blameless in today's society, and doesn't need to be addressed. But there are other problems that must be tackled in order to remedy the growing inequality in modern Chinese society.

To begin with, the social welfare system has also fallen behind the pace of economic development today. The vulnerable elements in society don't have their basic standard of welfare guaranteed, while the powerful are often not properly taxed, which increases the distance between rich and poor. This can be adjusted through improving the welfare system and tax system.

And due to the uncompleted economic reform and behindhand political reform, unequal opportunities have led to unbalanced incomes.

Collusion between government and businessmen, State monopolies and power-for-money deals have further widened the gap between rich and poor. I think this is the root cause of social injustice and arouses the fury of mainstream society.

So, in order to solve the social problem, we should stick to the principle that some people can earn more, while adjusting welfare and tax systems and eliminating unequal opportunities and corruption.

If the government avoids tackling these problems, it cannot satisfy the needs of vulnerable groups and eliminate social polarization. Dealing with these issues is the first step toward realistically grappling with growing social problems, and in alleviating extreme attitudes such as hatred of the rich or officials.

In any country, it is unpractical for the government to stand for the benefits of vulnerable groups without enough pressures and exchange of interests. Realistically, we have to deal with the entrenched issues of certain groups.

The recent political turmoil in Thailand and social unrest in the UK show that it is ridiculous to expect those social classes with vested interests will willingly stand aside and relinquish their benefits.

Without changing the political system, we also have methods to make the social resources and policy tilt to vulnerable groups and narrow the wealth gap. We can strengthen supervision by public opinion and protect people's freedom of speech.

Some attitudes toward the rich may be extreme, however, the pressure from public opinion and the timely disclosure of the truth can restrict plundering of social wealth and protect the legal rights of vulnerable groups. We can see the effect of public opinion in recent incidents.

We should also strengthen the supervision of the authorities and the punishments for the abuse of power. For instance, we should have an open and fair bidding and supervision process for public finance projects and reform the tax system.
There's only a certain amount of social wealth to go around at any one point. Different groups are competing for the distribution of that wealth. Only enough social pressure and social costs can make powerful groups compromise.

It may be not that effective and thorough to act by gradually strengthening the supervision of the powerful by the public.
However, it is much better than just complaining and attempting nothing. So, sticking to reform to the end is the practical way to solve the social polarization problems in China.

The author is a senior Internet observer. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn

couterpoint: Socialist measures can restrain damage of market