Weaponising parent-blame in post-welfare Britain

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tracey Jensen
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Moral Indignation ◽  
The Welfare State

This chapter examines how contested cultural austerity romances were mobilised to create high levels of public consent for ‘austere’ policy making in Britain. In particular, it considers how the classed romances of retreat and virtuous thrift came to feed the fire of moral indignation around the perceived excesses of the welfare state. The chapter analyses the reimagining of the welfare state: how welfare has been rewritten as a blockage to meritocracy and how the notion of welfare disgust was crafted. It shows how, in a state of apparently permanent austerity, new forms of hostility are directed at those seen as wasteful, irresponsible and a parasitic drain. This is evident in the so-called benefit broods, and the chapter uses the case of the Philpott family to explore how parent-blame was weaponised in in a broader ideological project that seeks to construct an anti-welfare commonsense.

III. Jeremy Bentham and the Nineteenth-Century Revolution in Government

1967 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 361-375 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. J. Hume
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Welfare State ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
State Intervention ◽  
The State ◽  
The Other ◽  
British Government ◽  
Jeremy Bentham ◽  
Cast Doubt ◽  
The Welfare State

Within the last twenty years, historians' views about the significance of ‘Benthamism’ for the development of British government in the nineteenth century have fluctuated pretty widely. In 1948 J. B. Brebner set decisively in motion a movement away from the interpretation, stated in classic but curiously ambivalent form by A. V. Dicey, which made Bentham the philosopher and advocate of an allegedly dominant policy of laissez faire or ‘individualism’. Brebner attacked both legs of Dicey's argument, contending that in the years 1825–70 (which Dicey had identified as the period of individualism) the scale and variety of State intervention were extensive, and that the State intervention of the time ‘in practically all of its many forms was basically Benthamite—Benthamite in the sense of conforming closely to that forbidding, detailed blueprint for a collectivist state, the Constitutional Code’. More recently, some specialists in nineteenth-century administrative history have accepted, and have in some directions extended, one side of Brebner's thesis, but have cast doubt on the other side. Thus, reinforcing Brebner's interpretation of Victorian policy-making, David Roberts has located ‘the origins of the welfare state’ in the period 1832–54, and Oliver MacDonagh has argued that in ‘the middle quarters of the nineteenth-century…(contrary to all expectation and desire) the collectivist system of the present day began to take its shape’. But in developing their themes Roberts and MacDonagh have tended to attach little importance to what Dicey called ‘opinion’—consciously formulated and coherently worked-out beliefs or programmes—and to stress instead the pragmatic responses of politicians and administrators to problems and events.

scholarly journals Innovations in Local Domiciliary Long-Term Care: From Libertarian Criticism to Normalisation

2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 433-444 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olivier Giraud ◽  
Barbara Lucas ◽  
Katrin Falk ◽  
Susanne Kümpers ◽  
Arnaud Lechevalier
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Welfare State ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Long Term Care ◽  
Social Innovation ◽  
Local Policy ◽  
Term Care ◽  
Social Innovations ◽  
The Welfare State

This article assesses how social innovations in the field of local domiciliary long-term care are shaped and implemented. It proposes a mapping of innovations in terms of two structuring discourses that inform welfare state reforms: a libertarian and a neo-liberal discourse. It then provides an analysis of the concrete trajectories of three local innovations for elderly people in Hamburg (Germany), Edinburgh (Scotland) and Geneva (Switzerland). Theoretically, social innovation is considered as a discursive process of public problem redefinition and institutionalisation. New coalitions of new actors are formed along this double process, and these transform the original discourse of innovation. The comparative analysis of the three processes of institutionalisation of local innovation shows that, in the context of local policy making, social innovations inspired by a libertarian critique of the welfare state undergo differentiated processes of normalisation.

"Rats, Man, and the Welfare State": Comment.

1959 ◽  
Vol 14 (9) ◽  
pp. 594-594
Author(s):  
James C. Crumbaugh
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
The Welfare State

Ausnahmesegment

2018 ◽  
Vol 48 (191) ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Schönig
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Social Housing ◽  
Integrated Approach ◽  
New Paradigm ◽  
Development Models ◽  
Form And Function ◽  
Institutional Organization ◽  
National Welfare ◽  
And Function ◽  
The Welfare State

Going along with the end of the “golden age” of the welfare state, the fordist paradigm of social housing has been considerably transformed. From the 1980s onwards, a new paradigm of social housing has been shaped in Germany in terms of provision, institutional organization and design. This transformation can be interpreted as a result of the interplay between the transformation of national welfare state and housing policies, the implementation of entrepreneurial urban policies and a shift in architectural and urban development models. Using an integrated approach to understand form and function of social housing, the paper characterizes the new paradigm established and nevertheless interprets it within the continuity of the specific German welfare resp. housing regime, the “German social housing market economy”.

REGULATION URGENCY CONCERNING ADMINISTRATIVE SANCTION GUIDELINES IN SPACE ADMINISTRATION

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rakhmat Bowo Suharto
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Welfare State ◽  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Spatial Development ◽  
Administrative Sanction ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Welfare State

The spatial development can be supported by sustainable development, efforts are needed to divert space through the imposition of sanctions on administration in the spatial field. In the context of a legal state, sanctions must be taken while ensuring their legality in order to provide legal protection for citizens. The problem is, the construction of administrative regulations in Law No. 26 of 2007 and PP No. 15 of 2010 contains several weaknesses so that it is not enough to provide clear arrangements for administrative officials who impose sanctions. For this reason, an administration is required which requires administrative officials to request administrative approval in the spatial planning sector. The success of the regulation requires that it is the foundation of the welfare state principle which demands the government to activate people's welfare. 15 of 2010, the main things that need to be regulated therein should include (1) the mechanism of imposing sanctions: (2) determination of the type and burden of sanctions; and (3) legal protection and supervision by the region.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document