The Varieties of Perception of Inequality in CEE: Income, Wealth and Opportunities

In an era of intensifying geopolitical rivalries and economic fragmentation, East-Central European countries navigate complex transformations that reshape both objective inequality patterns and subjective perceptions of social stratification. While post-socialist transitions initially promised convergence with Western European welfare models, the region has developed distinct trajectories of inequality perception that challenge established theoretical frameworks. Using an original nationally representative face-to-face survey (n = 1, 500) conducted in 2024, we employ a novel design decomposing inequality perception into three dimensions: income, wealth and opportunities, asking questions on perception, need and urgency of government intervention, long-term inequality and capital-non-capital dimensions. This paper examines how citizens in Lithuania, Hungary, and Moldova—representing divergent paths of European integration and state intervention strategies—perceive and legitimize these multidimensional inequalities. Drawing on critiques of System Justification Theory and the “paradox of redistribution,” this study investigates how post-socialist contexts generate unique patterns of inequality perception that deviate from Western theoretical predictions. While classical System Justification Theory suggests disadvantaged groups paradoxically legitimize existing hierarchies, emerging evidence from ECE indicates more complex, heterogeneous responses shaped by distinct legacies of state socialism and contemporary geopolitical positioning. The three countries represent critical variations: Lithuania’s Baltic liberal model with successful EU integration; Hungary’s state-interventionist approach with “Eastern Opening” policies and democratic backsliding; and Moldova’s fragmented development with EU membership prospects. Approximately 80% of respondents across all countries perceive their societies as highly unequal regarding income and wealth, though less so for opportunities— remarkable convergence given objective differences in inequality levels. Across these inequality measures, Hungary shows the highest concentration of “strongly agree” responses (56% agree, 37% strongly agree), Lithuania shows more moderate distribution (44% agree, 40% strongly agree), while Moldova falls between. This suggests subjective inequality perceptions may be decoupling from objective measures in contemporary ECE contexts. We find evidence for a nuanced inequality paradox varying by type. While demand for government intervention remains lower than inequality perception for income and wealth disparities—aligning with Korpi and Palme’s classic paradox—the pattern reverses for opportunities. Citizens express highest urgency for addressing opportunity gaps, suggesting post-socialist populations distinguish between “legitimate” market-based inequalities and “illegitimate” barriers to social mobility, reflecting socialist-era meritocratic ideals. Optimism about inequality follows unexpected patterns: Lithuania exhibits highest optimism, followed by Moldova and Hungary. These patterns correlate with political trust and economic insecurity, but also with voting preferences and overall institutional confidence. As the region faces geopolitical uncertainties and potential economic fragmentation, understanding how citizens perceive and respond to inequality becomes essential for maintaining social cohesion.