Political Ideology And Social Welfare

Front 1

Marxism

Back 1

Marxists see society in terms of a conflict between economic classes:

• A dominant class - the Bourgeoisie - owns and controls the means of production
• The industrial working class - proletariats - are exploited by the Bourgeoisie (Conflict Theory).

The Marxist analysis of welfare concentrates on its relationship to the exercise of power.

Front 2

Neo-Marxists

Back 2

Neo-Marxists argue that the state has two main functions:

1. To improve the conditions for the accumulation of capital i.e. for industries to make profits.

2. To legitimate the capitalist system by introducing measures (like welfare policies, pensions and health services) that lead people to accept the system as it stands.

Front 3

Criticisms of Marxism and Neo-Marxism

Back 3

The basic objections to marxist analysts are that:

• The description of 'capitalism' is false;
• Power in society is divided and not based in ownership and that
• States that promote the welfare of their citizens are not pretending to be more legitimate - they are more legitimate
  

Front 4

Many Forms of Socialism

Back 4

There are many forms of socialism:

1. A movement to improve society by collective action e.g. Fabianism

2. Approaches linked to collection action such as cooperatives

3. A set of arguments for social & economic organisation based on ownership and control by the community e.g. guild socialism

4. An ideal model of society based on cooperation and equality e.g. Utopian Socialism 5. A critique of industrial society e.g. Christian socialism

6. A range of vales rather than a particular view of how society works

Front 5

Key Socialist Values

Back 5

Liberty - Socialism calls for people to be able to do things through collective action also known as empowerment. This principle has been central to 'guild socialism' and trade unionism.

Equality - Socialism is egalitarian and committed to the reduction or removal of the disadvantages that arise in society.

Fratenity - Socialism is collectivist - people have to be understood in a social context rather than as individuals

Socialism is often represented in Europe in terms of 'solidarity' and requires the creation of systems of mutual support and aid.

Front 6

Social Democracy

Back 6

Based on the values of liberty, equality and fraternity but fused with a model of liberal democracy based on rights.

Two important differences between social democrats and socialists:

1. Many social democrats are individualists & stress the liberty of the individual restricting the role of the state;

2. Some social democrats are not concerned with removing inequality only with mitigating its effects through social arrangements and other favour equality of opportunity which implies the opportunity to be unequal

Front 7

Conservatism

Back 7

Conservatives believe in:

The importance of social order;

Respect for tradition and an emphasis on the importance of religion; and

that welfare is a secondary issue.

The kind of concerns that conservatives have are likely to impose restraints on welfare with a particular emphasis on traditional values in work, the family and nationhood.

Concerned with welfare when it might impact on public order: 'If you do not give people social reform they will give you a revolution".

Front 8

Christian Democrats

Back 8

Closely related to conservatism but important distinguishing features:

Strong emphasis on order but order to be achieved by moral restaints;

Such moral restraints have tended to reflect the influence of catholicism.

Catholic social teaching has emphasized both the limits of the state and the responsibility of people in families and communities to care for one another.

Christian Democrats tend to favour limitations in the role of the state while at the same time accepting moral responsibility for social welfare.

Front 9

Liberal Individualism

Back 9

Liberalism begins from the premise that everyone is an individual and that individuals have rights.

Liberals mistrust the state.

Central value of liberalism is freedom but not all freedoms equally important - main liberal values are concerned with freedom of assembly; freedom of speech and freedom of worship.

Liberalism important as a means of defending people from abuse by authority.

Conservatives of the new right are generally liberal individualists.

Front 10

Neo-Liberalism

Back 10

Competition is the defining characteristic of human relations;

Redefines citizens as consumers whose democratic choices are best exercised by buying & selling - a process that rewards merit & punishes inefficiency:

The market ensures everyone gets what they deserve.

Attempts to limit competition are inimical to liberty;

Minimal tax & regulation -privatize public services

Trade unions & collective bargaining distort the market

Inequality is virtuous - rewards utility & generates wealth which trickles down to enrich everyone.

Front 11

Fascism

Back 11

Fascist ideology is based on authoritarian collectivism;

The individual is meaningless; the collectivity (the state, the nation or the race) is paramount;

Fascism has been characterised by a strong social agenda: in Nazi Germany the desire to foster racial supremacy included extensive state intervention in society and the economy with a stress on socialisation and eugenic policies.

Front 12

"I have always believed politics is first and foremost about ideas."

Back 12

Blair 1998

Front 13

Governments are "blind forces blundering around in the dark, obstructing the operation of markets rather than improving them."

Back 13

Thatcher 1993

Front 14

"The meaning of social progress is the liberation from want and the unfolding of new possibilities of a more satisfactory and abundant life."

Back 14

Macmillan 1938

Front 15

"The Labour Party is a moral crusade or it is nothing."

Back 15

Harold Wilson quoted in Owen 1991

Front 16

Role of the state as viewed by political parties

Back 16

The left believes in big government and that the state should take action.

The right believes in more restrained role for the state.

All sides will argue that there exists a reciprocity between the state and individuals.

Reciprocity captured by the notion of citizenship.

Front 17

4 prerequisites of citizenship

Back 17

1. Membership

2. Participation

3. Entitlement

4. Obligation

Citizenship is the right to have rights.

Citizenship can be exclusive and can be used to deny people rights as well as to include them

Front 18

Citizenship - membership

Back 18

Turner 1993 sees membership as reflecting a belonging based upon juridical, political, economic and cultural practices.

One must also believe oneself to be a member.

Front 19

Citizenship - Participation

Back 19

To be a citizen one must participate in society.

Voet 1998 defines this as Aristotle did as participating in the political process i.e. voting. On this basis may people would not be deemed citizens in the UK as low voter turnout.

CG - I prefer notion of participation based on living a normal life.

Concept of social exclusion is the opposite of this idea i.e. that certain people or groups do not participate in 'normal' society.

Front 20

Citizenship - Entitlement

Back 20

Marshall 1950 refers to entitlements as 'rights': civil, political and social which respectively convey (a) the right to freedom (civil); (b) the right to join political decision making and (c) the right to enjoy a modicum of protection through welfare (social).

• Turner 1993 extends this concept of rights to embrace welfare, economic and educational rights.
• Epsing-Andersen 1990 - social rights are key and should be judged by the extent to which they make people independent of market forces.
  

Front 21

Citizenship - Obligations

Back 21

In return for citizenship a citizen must accept that s/he owes certain obligations to the state. These include: (a) to obey the law, (b) to pay taxes and (c) in countries with conscription to serve in the armed forces.

• Right wingers would also argue an obligation to work hard to look after oneself and one's family and not to be a burden to the state (Walters 1986). Duty to work has been emphasized in the UK by introduction of sanctions by way of benefit reduction if work not undertaken when offered it.
• Prisoners denied the vote in the UK - convicted prisoners have failed to fulfil their obligations as citizens so State withdraws their right to participate both through incarceration and denial of political rights for duration of their sentence.
  

Front 22

Mill 1859 on Freedom

Back 22

Mill contrasted the "liberty of will" - unconstrained individual freedom with "civil or social liberty" which puts some limits on the individual legitimacy imposed by society.

Front 23

Right wing definition of freedom

Back 23

More right wing definition of freedom focuses on the lack of constraints (often from state interference).

Friedman and other right wing economists talk of the 'free market'.

Adam Smith believed that government should protect citizens from coercion.

Front 24

Galston 1991 on freedom

Back 24

Galston 1991 argues that pursuit of individual freedom may logically lead to an indvidual's actions coming into conflict with those of others who are also seeking to exercise their freedom and so society is justified in placing certain constraints on individual freedom in the interests of society as a whole.

Front 25

Left wing view of freedom

Back 25

Left of centre definition of freedom allows for more boundaries to that freedom in order to promote some level of equality and to protect the vulnerable from exploitation.

Plant 1993 "The project of the left is to see individuals not only as producers and consumers, but as citizens acting together to ensure some common values and common ends."

Front 26

Meanings of Equality

Back 26

There are two meanings of equality:

1. Absolute equality

But absolute equality rarely a goal - perception that motivation and aspiration would be curtailed as would opportunity.

2. Equality of opportunity - entitlement to equal treatment or consideration

Proponents of equality tend to focus on equality as a minimum below which no one should be allowed to fall. Tawney 1964

Front 27

Equality of What?

Back 27

Equality of opportunity;

Equal rights;

Equal respect;

Equal treatment.

Perception of equality will inform not just economic and tax policy (redistribution) but also access to education, access to health and the whole of social policy.

Front 28

Challenges to notions of equality

Back 28

George Bernard Shaw 1913 - one cannot equalize anything about human beings except their income.
Berlin 1969 argues that natural talents are unequally distributed amongst individuals and that for real equality to exist everyone would have to be the same.

Front 29

Challenges to notions of equality - HAYEK

Back 29

Hayek 1960 argues that given that different people have different talents - equality is not compatible with personal freedom. His challengers were:

1. How can one determine what is a fair distribution of wealth?

2. There are many views of equality and in choosing to adopt and pursue one view a government would almost certainly be deemed unfair and authoritarian.

3. There would be resentment from those who see the government's redistribution as unfair.

Hayek concludes that pursuing equality is unachievable and illusory.

Govt should content itself with providing a framework of law that supports fair exchange process and no more. Market has no intent and so does not set out to be unfair or unjust. Markets allow plurality and as such cannot be coercive.

Front 30

Drake 2001 View on freedom and markets

Back 30

Drake 2001 argues that free markets do not stay free but become rigged as they move towards oligopoly and monopoly. Cites supermarkets as a case in point as they use their power to drive small shops out of business.

But can argue that expansion of supermarkets reflected consumers desire to shop differently and whilst supermarket gained economies of scale and could therefore undercut prices this development was consumer led.

Front 31

Joseph & Sumption 1979 on equality

Back 31

1. See equality as an emotional rather than a rational view.

2. Equality requires aggressive intervention and so may be destructive.

3. Leveling often means reducing to the lowest common denominator.

4. The pursuit of equality may be unfair.

5. Inequality may not be unjust i.e. if as a result of one's own efforts one has more is that a bad thing?

Front 32

Summary of arguments against equality

Back 32

1. It is not a feasible aim

2. Different people have different concepts of equality and so there can be no universally agreed definition

3. Equality will infringe liberty

4. Equality will involve an averaging leveling down to the lowest common denominator.

Front 33

Summary of arguments in favour of equality

Back 33

1. It is not the causes of inequality that matter but how society responds to these inequalities.

2. Justice and injustice are issues not of fact but of values and intent.

3. Hayek's view is based on a negative view of liberty being the absence of coercion but Plant sees liberty as having positive connotations - the freedom to work, the freedom to join in political debate etc.

4. Equality is about equality of consideration and equality of opportunity. Laski 1969 sees this as an absence of special privileges and everyone having the ability to access all opportunities

Front 34

French Declaration of Rights 1789

Back 34

"Men are born and remain free and equal in rights".

Front 35

Tawney 1964 on freedom

Back 35

"Freedom means the ability to do or refrain from doing definite things."

Front 36

Crick 1992 on equality

Back 36

"Equality must be rooted in how we treat each other as persons."

Front 37

Berlin 1960 on liberty

Back 37

People's liberty to choose "to live as they desire must be weighted against the claims of many other values of which equality or justice or happiness or security or public order are perhaps the most obvious examples. For this reason it cannot be unlimited."

Front 38

Justice

Back 38

The notion of justice is about what one perceives to be fair. It can therefore be used to answer the question as to the balance that should be struck between equality and inequality and freedom and constraint.

Front 39

Different concepts of justice

Back 39

1. Justice as utility (Mill and Bentham)

2. Justice as entitlement (Nozick and Hayek)

3. Justice as contract (Rawls)

4. Spheres of justice (Walzer)

Front 40

Definition of utility (Mill)

Back 40

Utility is the existence of pleasure and the absence of pain.
This is both the basis of everything that people desire, and as the foundation of morality.
Utilitarianism does not say that it is moral for people simply to pursue what makes them personally happy. Rather, morality is dictated by the greatest happiness principle; moral action is that which increases the total amount of utility in the world. Pursuing one's own happiness at the expense of social happiness would not be moral under this framework.

Front 41

Justice as Utility

Back 41

Mill 1859 saw justice a that which produced the most good or utility.

Justice is the greatest good for the greatest number of people however, this could lead to gross injustices by the many against the few.

Therefore Mills contended that the "general good" principle needed to be constrained by behaving in a way consistent with both law and morality.

Under the utilitarian approach, justice applies to all and all people benefit from the same rights - so equality of treatment is supported.

Front 42

Justice as Entitlement

Back 42

Nozick 1974 proposed an entitlement theory of justice including elements of justice in acquisition, in transfer and in rectification.

In terms of acquisition justice is ensured if transactions are entered into on a voluntary basis without coercion and make no one worse off.

The rectification principle allows for transactions entered into in contravention of the first two principles to be rectified i.e. changed.

Nozick's view of justice is quite limited - very much process focused view of justice. A transaction may be voluntary but how does one measure if it leaves someone worse off. Does Nozick intend to protect a fool from himself? Nozick views all non-voluntary transactions as theft e.g. taxes are theft.

Front 43

Justice as Contract - Rawls

Back 43

Rawls 1972 developed 2 fundamental principles of justice:

1. That every person should have equal rights to equal basic liberties compatible with similar liberty for all and

2. Social and economic inequalities are organized to give the greatest benefit to the least advantaged and done under conditions of equal opportunity

Rawls allows for inequalities to exist but there must be attempts made to give the least advantaged the most help and privilege should not attach to individuals but to situations open to all. As such welfare is a precondition of basic liberty and opportunity.

Front 44

Criticisms of Rawls' 'Justice as contract'

Back 44

Criticisms include the difficulty of measuring what distribution of inequalities would most benefit the least advantaged.

From a practical standpoint not all situations can be open to all people.

Rawls' proposition is based upon the society that people would design if they did not know what position they themselves would occupy in that society. People would therefore design a society cautiously as there was a risk that they themselves might end up occupying one of the least advantaged positions. Rawls ignores the possibility that people may be more pro-risk preferring risk and opportunity.

Front 45

Spheres of Justice - Kymlicka and Walzer

Back 45

Kymlicka 1990 argues that political principles do not lie on a straight line or continuum and so maintains that there is not one universal theory of justice. Justice needs to be considered in the context of the society that prevails today rather than as an abstract and overarching theory.

Walzer 1983 does not believe in an overarching theory of justice.

Justice must be seen in the context of particular societies at particular times - has been termed a pluralistic approach.

This can lead to people facing different types of justice at the same time in different spheres of their lives. Walzer does not see these spheres as interlinked.

Front 46

Young 1990 on Justice

Back 46

Young 1990 identified 5 types of oppression: 1. Exploitation

2. Marginalization 3. Powerlessness 4. Cultural imperialism and

5. Violence.

Justice is not just about distributive criteria; it also depends on the institutional conditions in a society. E.g. cultural imperialism occurs when the norms of one group render those of others irrelevant or ignored - this might apply to racism, religion or homosexuality.

Front 47

Phillips 1992 on Justice

Back 47

Justice must allow for differences between people. For Phillips justice is based on lived reality rather than a universal theory.

E.g. justice for disabled people might have a different application than for able people. This approach sees justice a being "grounded in difference" Drake 2001 as oppose to being "equality of treatment".

Front 48

Trade-offs in Justice

Back 48

Justice requires a number of trade-offs:

1. Between the freedom an individual may enjoy and the desire of the state to protect the freedom of others.

2. Between the freedom of an individual or individuals to gain wealth or power and the limits the state seeks to impose on the levels of power and inequality that are concentrated in a few hands.

Key point is whether justice is solely about process (Nozick) or also about outcomes. If the latter then liberty is bounded.

Front 49

Nozick - justice and social policy

Back 49

In Nozick's state welfare or social policy should cease to exist as it seeks to take wealth from those who have gained it legitimately.

For Nozick the main role of the state is to facilitate private transactions and to police for coercive ones.

Front 50

Equality of opportunity

Back 50

1. Question relating to equality of opportunity is when does inequality start?

2. If one believes in or accepts intergenerational disadvantage then inequality starts at conception (see Heckman commentary on intervening early).

3. "If a market is free then players within it would enjoy equality of opportunity." Drake 2001

4. Could be argued that not about equality of opportunity to do what one wants but equality of opportunity to maximise one's potential (Sen)

Front 51

Are rights subordinate to justice?

Back 51

If rights are subordinate to justice and one accepts Walzer's view that justice is a social construct then rights will change as justice is subject to change.

If rights transcend justice then rights will exist irrespective of justice e.g. fundamental human rights.

But may be different types of rights some of which are fundamental based on moral and human imperatives and others of which are subject to the laws or justice of a country and as such are subject to change.

Front 52

Unassailable Rights

Back 52

Freeden 1991 distinguishes between contextual and unassailable rights - the latter are "essential to the adequate functioning of a human being".

Jones 1994 3 aspects of unassailable rights:

1. They are permanent or cannot be eroded by time;

2. They are inalienable - they cannot be given or taken away; and

3. They are indefeasible - they cannot be overridden.

Front 53

Human Rights

Back 53

Human rights are seen as fundamental.

Denial of human rights is not only damaging to the individual but damaging to the community in which it occurs.

Question as to when we gain these rights - at conception, birth or somewhere between the two. Quickly raises the issue of abortion and the potentially conflicting rights of mother and child.

UN's Guiding principles on extreme poverty and human rights treats poverty as a violation of human rights.

Front 54

Function of Rights

Back 54

White 1984 4 functions of rights to convey: 1. Benefits

2. Choices 3. Entitlements and 4. Sanctions

Rights can be moral (e.g. those derived from the Ten Commandments) and/or utilitarian.

Kant saw autonomy as standing at the border between an individual's and a communities' rights. Kant also saw morality as self imposed (as humans can reason) rather than externally imposed.

Front 55

Welfare Rights

Back 55

Stoljar 1984 argues that there is no right to welfare. If A suffers a misfortune that B has no part in then why should B pay towards the upkeep of A? Nozick approach - i.e. as long as transactions are not coercive or illegal then each individual should be left to fend for himself.

But Rawls and other believe that justice should concern itself with outcomes. Suffering from poverty or need is not voluntary but may be caused by adverse circumstances eg. poor health, family circumstances etc. Denial of welfare rights could leave such people socially excluded.

Front 56

What constitutes welfare rights?

Back 56

Debate over what constitutes welfare rights - is it just money; right to work; right to health.

Big debate over work - (a) What responsibility does an individual have to find work? (b) Can the state sanction those who can but choose not to work? (c) Rights of disabled people to work? (d) Rights of employer to choose the 'best' employees?

Debate about rights is political but also takes place within a financial framework and as financial constraints loom large the debate about rights is in part being driven by money and the budget deficit.

Front 57

Inequality

Back 57

Inequality can manifest itself in a number of ways:

1. Inequality of opportunity

2. Inequality of treatment

3. Inequality of outcome

We should be concerned about inequality because:

(a) People need endowment to participate in the market and avoid famine;

(b) The market may generate inefficient outcomes; and

(c) Justice

Front 58

Types of Rights

Back 58

1. Civil rights - necessary for individual freedom

2. Political rights - necessary for collective freedom and action

3. Social rights - necessary to live life according to the standards of society and

4. Human rights - moral principles or normative statements that set expected standards of human behaviour

Front 59

3rd Generation and Collective Rights

Back 59

Right to:

Self determination

Economic and social development

Healthy environment

Natural resources

Communicate and communication rights

Participate in cultural heritage

Intergenerational equity sustainability

Front 60

Social Justice

Back 60

Social justice generally refers to the idea of creating a society or institution that is based on the principles of equality and solidarity that understands and values human rights, and that recognises the dignity of every human being

Front 61

Aristotle

Back 61

Aristotle divided the idea of justice into two main parts:
1. Corrective justice and
2. Distributive justice.
Distributive justice refers to the division of shares in social benefits/ burdens, and is thus concerned with tax/spend policy.
Corrective justice is concerned with the rectification of injustice and thus entails specific social policy interventions.

Front 62

Rawls'“Theory of Justice” (1972),

Back 62

In Rawls'“Theory of Justice” (1972), the distinction lies between the concept of justiceand particular conceptions of justice.

• For Rawls, ‘justice as fairness’ is themost appropriate conception of justice, and an agreement on the criteria for ajust society is feasible.
  
• In other words,for Rawls the concept/conceptiondistinction does not imply that the concept of justice is essentially contestedand also, that not all contested concepts are ‘essentially’ contested concepts.

Front 63

Dworkin's theory (1988)

Back 63

The concept/conception distinction is found also in Dworkin's theory (1988).

• For Dworkin, ‘equality’ is not an‘essentially contested concept’ because the identification and application ofstable criteria for its meaning is feasible.
• Equality israther an ‘interpretive’ concept; i.e. a concept that is subject tointerpretation.

Front 64

Hayek (1960)

Back 64

Famously, Hayek(1960) disputed the validity of the very idea of social justice.
The principle ofsocial justice is just an ‘anathema’ (Hayek1976).
Hayek arguedfor a strong state that promotes not justice but the market and ruled outredistribution of wealth.

Front 65

Hedonic-wellbeing and Eudaimonic well-being

Back 65

A hedonic view of well-being equates well-being with pleasure and happiness (Kahneman 1999).

A eudaimonic view of well-being conceptualizes well-being in terms of the cultivation of personal strengths and contribution to the greater good (Aristotle),

Front 66

Oakeshott 1975 on freedom

Back 66

Understands freedom as referring to the necessity that an individual must have the capacity to act as well as the scope to do so.

Parallels with Sen's capability theory - do individuals have the functionings in order to fulfil their capability?

Front 67

Rousseau 1762 on freedom/liberty

Back 67

Rousseau holds that a person is free when he or she was subject to laws imposed by him/herself as a result of his/her participation in the formulation of society's collective rules about what is just.

N.B. Sees liberty residing at least in part in some collective control over every day life.

BUT what about when laws imposed by some on others who have not participated e.g. apartheid.

Front 68

Freedom not an absolute concept

Macallum 1967

Back 68

Freedom is not an absolute concept but a relative one residing in the formula:

X is free from Y to do Z.

N.B. to be free to sell newspapers is the same as to be free from being prevented from selling newspapers.

Front 69

List 4 grounds on which freedom of the individual is proposed.

Back 69

1. That the exercise of free will is an essential part of being human.

2. That freedom is a necessary factor in the progress of civilization

3. That freedom to choose is a prerequisite of economic efficiency and

4. That freedom of the individual is a bulwark against the political tyranny of the left

Front 70

Arendt 1968 - left's view of liberty

Back 70

Definition of liberty based only on a person's autonomy neglects the roles of public institutions in safeguarding individuals from depotism.

Front 71

Left's concerns with deregulation

Back 71

Where deregulation occurs, some citizens can secure privileges at the cost of disadvantage for others Alcock 1996.

Deregulation can foster widening inequalities.

E.g. Robber barons - Russian oligarchs

Front 72

Right and Left Political views of freedom

Back 72

On the right, emphasis on freedom as in the absence of external (esp. govt) interference, with boundaries if any self-imposed traditional moral values.

On the left freedom has generally been defined in more collective terms with individuals ceding some measure of personal liberty to enjoy freedom from coercion.