Welfare state Flashcards
Judt - postwar economic of planning
Drew directly upon lessons of 1930s
Successful recovery must preclude any return to economic stagnation, depression, and unemployment
Lay behind creation of the Modern European welfare state
Judt - 1940s conventional wisdom on causes of the war
Political polarisation came due to economic depression and its social costs
Fascists and Communists thrived on social despair, so the ‘condition of the people’ question must be addressed
Judt - examples of rudimentary welfare provisions
Germany typically most advanced, instituted pension, accident and medical insurance under Bismarck
Pre-WW1 embryonic national insurance and pension schemes in Britain
Britain and France introduced ministries of health just after WW1
Judt - limits of initial welfare reforms
None of these arrangements were comprehensive welfare systems
They were cumulative ad hoc reforms, each dressing a particular social problem or improving on previous schemes
E.g. scope of British pension and medical insurance schemes very limited (only working men)
Judt - lack of pre-war state responsibility
Nowhere was there yet any recognition of an obligation upon the state to guarantee a given set of services to all citizens
Judt - role of the war in transforming state obligation
Just as WW1 precipitated legislation and social provision, WW2 transformed the role of the modern state and the expectations placed upon it
Judt - general points about postwar welfare states
Provision of social services chiefly concerned education, housing and medical care, as well as transport
Social security consisted mainly of state insurance agains illness, unemployment, accident, and the perils of old age
Every European state in the postwar years provided or financed most of these resources, some more than others
Judt - difference between postwar welfare states
Lay in the schemes set in place to pay for the provisions
Some collected revenue through tax and provided free/heavily subsidised care and services e.g. Britain
In France and smaller countries, citizens had to pay up front for medical provision, but could then claim most expenses from the state
Judt - reason for differences between postwar welfare states
Systems of national finance and accounting, but also a differing strategy choice
In isolation, social insurance, however generous, was not in principal politically radical (present in most conservative regimes)
Comprehensive welfare systems, however, were inherently re-distributive due to their universal character and sheer scale
Thus the welfare state in itself was a radical undertaking, and the variations in states reflected political calculation also
Judt - Eastern European opinion of welfare states
Communist regimes after 1948 did not usually favour universal welfare systems
They did not need to as they were at liberty to redistribute resources with force without spending scarce state funds on public services
E.g. they frequently excluded peasants from social insurance and political arrangements on political grounds
Judt - Catholic Europe
Long-established local and communal coverage against unemployment probably impeded the development of universal systems by reducing the need for the,
Judt - desire for full employment
Particularly marked in countries where inter-war unemployment had been especially traumatic (UK, Belgium), and so there was a clear desire to keep employment close to full
Judt - comparative ambitiousness
Sweden and Norway were vanguard of benefit provision, and West Germany kept in place Nazi era chilbirth programmes
However, Britain saw the most ambitious effort to build, from scratch, a genuine ‘Welfare State’
Reflected outright 1945 Labour majority, leaving them free to legislate unlike many other coalition governments
Also derived from rather distinctive sources of British reformism
Judt - Beveridge report
In 1942 - it was an indictment of the social injustices of pre-1939 British society and a policy template for root and branch reform once war was over
Even the Conservatives did not dare oppose its core recommendations, and it was the moral basis for the most popular and enduring elements of Labour’s postwar programme
Judt - Beveridge report assumptions
Four key assumptions, all of which were to be incorporated into British policy for the next generation
There should be an NHS, adequate state pension, family allowances and near-full employment
On this assumption generous provisions could be made, paid by levies on wage packets and progressive taxation
Judt - welfare state implications in Britain
Non working women got first coverage; humiliation and social dependency of Poor Law system removed; free medicine and dentists at point of service
British Welfare State was both a completion of earlier reforms and a genuinely radical departure
Most comprehensive social coverage attempted on so generous a scale all at once
Judt - cost of the welfare state
Heavy - French spending on social services increased 64% 1938-49
Britain - by 1949 nearly 17% of all public expenditure was on social security alone
Judt - reasons why Europeans were willing to pay so much
Because times were difficult, and welfare systems guaranteed a minimum of fairness
Welfare states were not politically divisive (not revolutionary) and long term beneficiaries often middle classes - bound the classes together
Chief basis that these services corresponded with the proper tasks of government
Judt - differences in achieving aims
Easier in the small population of a wealthy, homogenous country like Sweden than in one like Italy
But faith in the state was at least as marked, possibly more, in poor countries as in rich ones, since only the state could offer hope
Judt - state as a source of community and social cohesion
For the generation of 1945, some workable balance between political freedoms and the rational, equitable function of the administrative state seemed the only sensible route out of the abyss
Garland - three concentric circles of welfare state government
First characterises it as welfare for the poor - narrowest conception, preferred by the opponents of the welfare state
Second focuses on social insurance, social rights, and social services (core elements abidingly popular with the electorate)
Third highlights economic management and the role of the government in regulating the state
Garland - metaphor for the welfare state
Capitalist economy - a dynamic machine for generating private profits through competitive production and market exchange
Welfare state - retrofitted set of gears, breaks, and distributors to steer the capitalist juggernaut along a socially acceptable course
Garland - lack of utopian ideals in welfare states
Product not of revolutionary idealism but piecemeal reform and cross-class coalitions, principles created by civil servants
Therefore they rarely provide unbridled enthusiasm, open to attack from both sides by committing to ‘middle way’ solutions
Ameliorative rather than curative - rarely achieve complete success or large-scale victory
Garland - range of ideals from welfare state creators
From conservative Bismarck, liberal Beveridge and Keynes and democratic socialists Attlee and Bevan
All fought for welfare state as they were troubled by recurring evidence of economic instability and uncertainty
Case rested on real world problems and practical solutions
