The Spirit Level

The Spirit Level provoked passionate discussion when it was first released in 2009. Many commentators, primarily those on the political left, embraced the book’s message and were keen to endorse Pickett and Wilkinson’s argument that governments should work towards reducing income inequality. In his review of the book, author Johann Hari calls The Spirit Level “A compass to rebuild our societies…a shining vision” (“Testimonials.” Equality Trust). Journalist Collette Douglas Home agreed that the book affirmed how inequality causes social harm, writing, “Graph after graph demonstrates cause and dire effect” (“Testimonials”).

This work also received critical acclaim from various associations and newspapers. The Guardian, a left-leaning British newspaper, named it one of the top 100 books of the century. The New Statesman, which describes itself as “the leading progressive political and cultural magazine in the United Kingdom,” also praised The Spirit Level, naming it one of the top 10 books of the decade (“About the New Statesman.” The New Statesman). This book was awarded the Title Publication of the Year by the Political Studies Association, a British organization that studies political processes and their consequences.

Pickett and Wilkinson’s argument has also attracted criticism, most of which centers on the accuracy of their research methods. In his review of The Spirit Level in The Guardian, Richard Reeves critiqued the writers’ penchant for including even loose correlations of social problems with inequality. He writes, “Some of the relationships actually look rather weak. One of the graphs proves, apparently, that ‘women’s status is significantly worse in more unequal states, although this is not a particularly strong relationship.’ You do not need to be a statistician to worry about that sentence” (Reeves, Richard. “In Search of the Truth About Equality in Britain.” The Guardian, 4 Apr. 2009).

Moreover, Reeves noted that while the authors establish correlations between problems and inequality, they cannot prove causality. He explains:

But the force of these findings is diminished by the sense that the authors have simply scoured the data for signs of malignancy in unequal societies. Charts are produced showing that more equal societies recycle more of their rubbish and devote more state resources to foreign aid. Yet it is hard to see that this has anything to do with equality in itself. It is not a causal relationship: what’s happening here, surely, is that the political cultures likely to promote greater redistribution are also likely to promote recycling and foreign aid spending (Reeves).

Several other commentators have also questioned the authors’ methods of data selection and analysis. In their article “Un-level Ground” in The Wall Street Journal, writers Nima Sanandaji, Tino Sanandaji, Arvid Malm, and Christopher Snowdon dissect the book’s argument and criticize the authors’ logic and approach. They write, “This book purports to offer strong support for the claim that income redistribution creates social good. Unfortunately, this conclusion doesn’t stand up to our research” (Sanandaji, Nima, et al. “Un-Level Ground.” The Wall Street Journal, 9 July 2010).

In his book Enlightenment Now, psycholinguist and professor Steven Pinker argues that The Spirit Level does not convincingly show a causal relationship between inequality and social problems. He writes, “Wilkinson and Pickett’s sample was restricted to developed countries, but even within that sample the correlations are evanescent” (Pinker, Steven. Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress. Penguin Books, 2019, pp. 100-01). Pinker also cites other studies that show unequal countries with happier populations, casting doubt on Wilkinson and Pickett’s findings.

With the passionate discourse around its claims and methods, The Spirit Level touched a nerve amongst politicians, social scientists, and social commentators, making it one of the most-discussed books on politics and society in recent years.