A social system is a prime example of an entity that is larger than the sum of its parts.

A society, being the largest human social system, is also the most complex.

The institutions, both formal and informal, that provide the main framework for a societal system usually serve two functions --protection and control. The paradox or dialectic of these two functions is quite apparent, and reflects the paradox inherent in any human social system, be it a system of two (for instance, a married couple) of several hundred (mudcat) or millions (a society).

Imbedded in that dialectic is another--the autonomy of the individual vs. the need of our species for social structure to survive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm realizing I'm a long way from drawing my conclusions, and getting to that point may be so dry and convoluted that I'll be the only one still awake when I get there. I don't want to kill this thread by accident. And I'm guessing most people reading this thread are already knowledgable about social theory and social systems theory, and don't need a 101 course from me to see what I am trying to articulate.   

Where I'm ultimately headed is that poverty and oppression is an effect of society, any society of any size, as opposed to an intention of that society, or an intention of the vast majority of the individuals who make up that society. In macro-terms, focusing on blame-whether you are blaming the poor guy for being poor, or the rich guy for being rich, is probably not very useful to any effort to mitigate poverty.

Janie