scholarly journals The Monopoly of Capitalism in Achieving the Welfare of Indonesian Democracy

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yusriadi Yusriadi
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Welfare State ◽  
Free Market ◽  
Social Rights ◽  
Economic Resilience ◽  
Free Markets ◽  
Great Achievement ◽  
The People ◽  
Market Liberalisation ◽  
The Welfare State

The welfare state was a great achievement of civilisation in the 20th century. In this century, the State equips civil rights and freedoms with social rights. That is why democracy and the welfare state must go hand in hand. The welfare state has freedom with millions of people from their various social origins to fight market difficulties and open opportunities in life. Among other things, economic power can identify global competition, free markets, and various kinds of public policies that are oppressive. Market liberalisation demands social and economic resilience of the people so that the tide of the free market does not displace it. The modern economy is not just a slogan, but needs to be actualised to empower the economic capabilities of the lower classes of society.

Class in Thatcherite Ideology and Rhetoric

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Florence Sutcliffe-Braithwaite
Keyword(s):  
Middle Class ◽  
Welfare State ◽  
Political Ideology ◽  
Free Market ◽  
Hard Work ◽  
Language And Thought ◽  
Trade Unionism ◽  
Self Reliance ◽  
Classless Society ◽  
The Welfare State

This chapter examines Thatcherite rhetoric about class and individualism. Thatcher needed to distance herself from her own, narrow, upper-middle-class image; she also wanted to rid politics of class language, and thought that class was—or should be—irrelevant in 1980s Britain because of ‘embourgeoisement’. For Thatcher, ‘bourgeois’ was defined by particular values (thrift, hard work, self-reliance) and she wanted to use the free market to incentivize more of the population to display these values, which she thought would lead to a moral and also a prosperous society. Thatcherite individualism rested on the assumption that people were rational, self-interested, but also embedded in families and communities. The chapter reflects on what these conclusions tell us about ‘Thatcherism’ as a political ideology, and how these beliefs influenced Thatcherite policy on the welfare state, monetarism, and trade unionism. Finally, it examines Major’s rhetoric of the ‘classless society’ in the 1990s.

scholarly journals ESTADO DE BEM-ESTAR SOCIAL: UMA REVISÃO DE LITERATURA

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
pp. 906-936
Author(s):  
Fernando da Cruz Souza ◽  
Nelson Russo de Moraes
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Social Services ◽  
Social Protection ◽  
Public Investment ◽  
Social Rights ◽  
Amartya Sen ◽  
Social Policies ◽  
Social Citizenship ◽  
Palabras Clave ◽  
The Welfare State

A austeridade permanente e a disputa de quem ganha o quê, quando e como, lógica intrínseca às políticas públicas, colocam as políticas sociais brasileiras em constantes testes. O universalismo tentativo iniciado com a Constituição de 1988 pareceu caminhar para uma ampliação da cidadania social no país, mas tem sofrido constantes ataques por falta de um compromisso de classes em torno de um projeto de país mais ou menos homogêneo. Diante dessa falta de precisão no estabelecimento Estado de Bem-estar brasileiro, em especial, pelo encolhimento no investimento público previsto para os próximos anos e com os governos mais alinhados a maior mercadorização dos serviços sociais, torna-se importante revisitar a trajetória do Welfare State em suas origens e objetivos, a fim de compreender como chegamos até aqui, o que podemos esperar do futuro e quais a intervenções necessárias para que nos aproximemos de uma inclusão sensível do grande contingente de pessoas ainda sujeitas a uma cidadania de segunda classe no Brasil. Para atender a esse objetivo, este trabalho realizou uma revisão bibliográfica convencional sobre o Estado de Bem-Estar Social, elencando a partir dela as razões históricas de seu surgimento, a tipologia de Esping-Andersen, a noção de funcionamentos e capacitações de Amartya Sen e os períodos constitutivos do bem-estar no Brasil.   PALAVRAS-CHAVE: Proteção social. Desenvolvimento. Direitos sociais.     ABSTRACT The permanent austerity and the dispute over who wins what, when and how, logic intrinsic to public policies, puts Brazilian social policies in constant tests. The tentative universalism that began with the 1988 Constitution seemed to be heading for a broadening of social citizenship in the country, but it has been under constant attack for the lack of a class compromise around a homogeneous country project. Given this lack of precision in the establishment of the Brazilian Welfare State due to the shrinking public investment expected in the coming years and with the governments most aligned to the greater commodification of social services, it is important to revisit the trajectory of the Welfare State in its origins and objectives, in order to understand how far we have come, what we can expect from the future and what interventions are needed to bring us closer to a sensitive inclusion of the large contingent of people still subject to second class citizenship in Brazil. To meet this objective, this paper has carried out a conventional bibliographical review of the Welfare State, listing from it the historical reasons for its emergence, Esping-Andersen's typology, Amartya Sen's notion of functioning and capabilities and the constitutive periods of welfare in Brazil.   KEYWORDS: Social protection. Development. Social rights.     RESUMEN La austeridad permanente y la disputa sobre quién gana qué, cuándo y cómo, la lógica intrínseca a las políticas públicas, pone a las políticas sociales brasileñas en pruebas constantes. El tentativo universalismo que comenzó con la Constitución de 1988 parecía dirigirse a una ampliación de la ciudadanía social en el país, pero ha estado bajo ataque constante por la falta de un compromiso de clase en torno a un proyecto de país más o menos homogéneo. Dada esta falta de precisión en el establecimiento del Estado de bienestar brasileño, en particular, debido a la reducción de la inversión pública esperada en los próximos años y con los gobiernos más alineados con la mayor mercantilización de los servicios sociales, es importante revisar la trayectoria del Estado de bienestar en sus orígenes y objetivos, para comprender cómo hemos llegado hasta ahora, qué podemos esperar del futuro y qué intervenciones son necesarias para acercarnos a una inclusión sensible del gran contingente de personas aún sujetas a una ciudadanía de segunda clase en Brasil. Para cumplir con este objetivo, este documento ha llevado a cabo una revisión bibliográfica convencional del Estado del Bienestar, enumerando de él las razones históricas de su surgimiento, la tipología de Esping-Andersen, la noción de funcionamiento y capacidadess de Amartya Sen, y períodos constitutivos de bienestar en Brasil.   PALABRAS CLAVE: Protección social. Desarrollo. Derechos sociales.  

Ripples from the First Wave: The Monarchical Origins of the Welfare State

2015 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 992-1016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eileen McDonagh
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Max Weber ◽  
Care Work ◽  
Public Provision ◽  
The Public ◽  
Goods And Services ◽  
Parental Roles ◽  
The People ◽  
The Family ◽  
The Welfare State

Before the welfare state, people were protected from disabilities resulting from illness, old age, and other infirmities by care work provided within the family. When the state assumes responsibility for care-work tasks, in effect it assumes parental roles, thereby becoming a form offamilial governmentin which the public provision of goods and services is analogous to care work provided in the family. My research pushes back the origins of the state’s obligation to care for people to a preindustrial form of government, hereditary monarchies—what Max Weber termed patrimonialism. It explicates how monarchs were cast as the parents of the people, thereby constituting kingship as a care work regime that assigned to political rulers parental responsibility for the welfare of the people. Using historical and quantitative analysis, I establish that retaining the legitimacy of monarchies as the first form of familial government in the course of Western European democratizing makes it more credible to the public and to political elites to accept the welfare state as the second form of familial government. That, in turn, promotes a more robust public sector supportive of social provision. The results reformulate conceptions of the contemporary welfare state and its developmental legacies.

Work and Welfare as Strategic Complements in Germany’s Postwar Economic Order

2020 ◽  
pp. 54-84
Author(s):  
Philip Manow
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Automobile Industry ◽  
Full Employment ◽  
High Growth ◽  
Social Rights ◽  
Social Democrats ◽  
State Expansion ◽  
The North ◽  
Wage Coordination ◽  
The Welfare State

Chapter 4 argues that in the three high-growth postwar decades, the welfare state facilitated corporatist cooperation between labor and capital, specifically in the form of wage coordination, thereby avoiding inflation in periods of (almost) full employment. The period of high growth and full employment allowed, in turn, welfare state expansion which was always supported by a grand coalition of Christian and Social Democrats. The chapter reconstructs in more detail how industrial conflict in the metalworking sector—both in the north of Germany, in the shipyards, and in the south of Germany, in the automobile industry—over social rights instead of wages laid the ground for wage coordination (and moderation) German style. It also explains how the welfare state helped unions and employers’ associations to “police the bargain,” to stabilize an inherently unstable arrangement between capital and labor.

Denmark: The Rise of Fascism and the Decline of the Nordic Model

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 133-145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jasna Balorda
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Free Market ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Far Right ◽  
Social Democratic ◽  
People's Party ◽  
Social Sphere ◽  
The Social ◽  
Social Agendas ◽  
The Welfare State

Contrary to its conventional image as a social-democratic paragon, the Danish welfare state has, in recent decades, been undergoing significant changes as a response to the intrusion into the social sphere by self-regulating markets and a final departure from Keynesian politics of universalism and solidarity. This article examines the evident decline of the Nordic model as a result of neoliberal globalisation and establishes an association between the erosion of the welfare state and the emergence of fascist political sentiment in Denmark. An analysis of the Danish People's party and its growing public support among the disenfranchised working class communities in Denmark demonstrates how those overlooked by the free market and unrepresented by the liberal left become increasingly more receptive to the proposed social agendas of the far right campaigns.

America’s Wars on Poverty and the Building of the Welfare State

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Torstensson
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Welfare State ◽  
Vietnam War ◽  
New York Times ◽  
The United States ◽  
War On Poverty ◽  
Weak Center ◽  
Compassionate Conservatism ◽  
The Welfare State

On January 5, 2014—the fiftieth anniversary of President Lyndon Johnson’s launch of the War on Poverty—the New York Times asked a panel of opinion leaders a simple question: “Does the U.S. Need Another War on Poverty?” While the answers varied, all the invited debaters accepted the martial premise of the question—that a war on poverty had been fought and that eliminating poverty was, without a doubt, a “fight,” or a “battle.” Yet the debate over the manner—martial or not—by which the federal government and public policy has dealt with the issue of poverty in the United States is still very much an open-ended one. The evolution and development of the postwar American welfare state is a story not only of a number of “wars,” or individual political initiatives, against poverty, but also about the growth of institutions within and outside government that seek to address, alleviate, and eliminate poverty and its concomitant social ills. It is a complex and at times messy story, interwoven with the wider historical trajectory of this period: civil rights, the rise and fall of a “Cold War consensus,” the emergence of a counterculture, the Vietnam War, the credibility gap, the rise of conservatism, the end of “welfare,” and the emergence of compassionate conservatism. Mirroring the broader organization of the American political system, with a relatively weak center of power and delegated authority and decision-making in fifty states, the welfare model has developed and grown over decades. Policies viewed in one era as unmitigated failures have instead over time evolved and become part of the fabric of the welfare state.

Why all Welfare States (Including Laissez-Faire Ones) Are Unreasonable

1998 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerald F. Gaus
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Welfare State ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Free Market ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Welfare States ◽  
Market Failures ◽  
Human Welfare ◽  
Laissez Faire

Liberal political theory is all too familiar with the divide between classical and welfare-state liberals. Classical liberals, as we all know, insist on the importance of small government, negative liberty, and private property. Welfare-state liberals, on the other hand, although they too stress civil rights, tend to be sympathetic to “positive liberty,” are for a much more expansive government, and are often ambivalent about private property. Although I do not go so far as to entirely deny the usefulness of this familiar distinction, I think in many ways it is misleading. In an important sense, most free-market liberals are also “welfare-state” liberals. I say this because the overwhelming number of liberals, of both the pro-market and the pro-government variety, entertain a welfarist conception of political economy. On this dominant welfarist view, the ultimate justification of the politico-economic order is that it promotes human welfare. Traditional “welfare-state liberals” such as Robert E. Goodin manifestly adopt this welfarist conception. But it is certainly not only interventionists such as Goodin who insist that advancing welfare is the overriding goal of normative political economy. J. R. McCulloch, one of the great nineteenth-century laissez-faire political economists, was adamant that “freedom is not, as some appear to think, the end of government: the advancement of public prosperity and happiness is its end.” To be sure, McCulloch would have disagreed with Goodin about the optimal welfare-maximizing economic policy: the welfarist ideal, he and his fellow classical political economists believed, would best be advanced by provision of a legal and institutional framework — most importantly, the laws of property, contract, and the criminal code — that allows individuals to pursue their own interests in the market and, by so doing, promote public welfare. In general, what might be called the “classical-liberal welfare state” claims to advance welfare by providing the framework for individuals to seek wealth for themselves, while welfarists such as Goodin insist that a market order is seriously flawed as a mechanism for advancing human welfare and, in addition, that government has the competency to “correct market failures” in the provision of welfare.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document