Austerity is the main culprit of protest sentiments. Part 2

Inequality is also an engine of protest.

Research conducted in 1994 by scientists at Harvard University and Bocconi University (analyzing data from 71 countries between 1960 and 1985) showed that higher levels of income inequality were associated with increased social instability. It turned out that unrest often erupted where the affluent middle class was weakened.
This conclusion is borne out by today's events. In the US, according to one estimate, 58% of real incomes over the last 30 years have accrued to 1% top earners: hence the Wall Street demonstrators protesting with the slogan "We-99%". The growing income gap in American society is reflected in the dramatic "polarization" of the labor force, i.e., the gap between high and low skill at the expense of middle skill (and middle wage) is widening.
Structural changes in the world economy can lead to instability in both fast-growing and slow-growing countries. Rapidly developing countries, with increasing consumption, are putting pressure on a deliberately inefficient global food commodity market. In 2011, the IMF concluded (the study was conducted in 120 countries from 1970 to 2007) that a 10% increase in food commodity prices, leads to a doubling of anti-government protests, but only in low-income countries.
Rapidly growing economies that undermine existing social institutions and provoke the movement of labor can also cause instability. In China, mass migration associated with rapid economic growth and urbanization is often considered a cause of instability. Incidents of "rioting" have steadily increased since 1993, even as China's economy shows dramatic growth. Ricardo Hausmann of Harvard University argues that Egypt, similarly, by taking steps toward economic liberalization, has caused a propensity for protests.
Harvard University professor James Robinson believes that non-democratic governments traditionally have the ability to administratively redistribute income. In the West, this is not an option. A small increase in revenues and less austerity could move the country back from the brink of public anger. But if social unrest has its roots in the effects of structural economic reforms, larger welfare payments will become necessary. India's unrest caused by inequality, for example, was successfully ended by income redistribution.

According to the foreign press for ForTrader.ru