Basic Readings in Western Social Science—Welfare

Author: (English) Barry / Chu Jianguo
Publisher:
Publishing Date: 2005-01-01
Features: This series is jointly launched by Jilin People's Publishing House and McGraw-Hill, the world's largest educational publishing giant. It aims to help the general public quickly grasp the basic knowledge of Western social sciences through the simplest and most convenient approach, positioning itself as a "primer" in the field of philosophy and social sciences. As a basic textbook in Western universities, the series has been popular for 20 years, written entirely by leading scholars from various fields in the West, and continuously updated to keep pace with changing times. It has become one of the most authoritative basic social science readers recognized in the West, serving as the first step for young scholars to enter the of social sciences. Some of its books, such as Liberalism and Postmodernism, have achieved remarkable sales, gaining both acclaim from the Western intellectual community and popularity among the public.
We eagerly hope that this series can also win the same recognition in China as it did in the West. "Welfare" is a controversial concept in social sciences, often sparking fierce debates among various schools of political science and economics. Norman Barry's book primarily explores the relationship between the concept of welfare and different political philosophies, providing valuable theoretical references for readers concerned with welfare issues. Welfare philosophy originated in 19th-century utilitarianism, when Adam Smith's laissez-faire philosophy was the mainstream of political thought. However, various welfare concepts also emerged alongside it. Although Smith believed that markets could promote public interest while individuals pursued their own interests, he also expressed concerns about market failures, arguing that the government, beyond maintaining law and order, had a responsibility to establish and maintain certain public works and institutions. This can be understood as welfare not being maximized solely through pure transactions, as there exist desirable goods that cannot be priced by the market, requiring government intervention. Bentham proposed a collective form of welfare, with his "greatest happiness for the greatest number" serving as a basis for government welfare policies. However, the ambiguity in Bentham's theory lies in that it could support both a highly laissez-faire economic theory and a welfare theory that allows for state power expansion. Later utilitarian thinkers developed Bentham's theories in the direction of welfare. Bentham's secretary, Chadwick, licensed state action based on efficiency principles, expressing optimism about the government's ability to improve welfare. Meanwhile, John Stuart Mill introduced the concept of social justice into classical liberalism, and his theory of equal opportunity justice became the ideological foundation of 20th-century welfare philosophy. The birth of modern welfare theory depended on reinterpreting political concepts such as freedom, equality, and community. Green defined freedom as an active power or capacity that enables us to do and enjoy what is worth doing and worth enjoying, as well as to do and enjoy it together with others. Hobson and Fabian socialists, however, argued that classical liberalism had irreconcilable weaknesses, as unregulated capitalism would not exhibit Adam Smith's equilibrium tendencies but rather financial oligarchic dictatorship. L.T. Hobhouse believed that freedom was not merely the absence of restrictions but must include the full development of individual personality. Freedom that cares about personal development requires an appropriate concept of equality, as "freedom without equality is a synonym for noble words and tragic results." Significant inequalities transform individual freedom into the power of some over others, and the state has a responsibility to correct this through the collective good.
Positive liberty theorists generally support the active role of the state, as its existence is to compensate for the shortcomings of the market in providing welfare. Their welfare arguments often translate into a rights theory, specifically positive rights theory, which demands that the state enhance individuals' opportunities and capabilities in society. This right is a legal right that does not emphasize the community ties that support welfare, and thus can even justify the transfer of material wealth abroad. Due to the shortcomings of rights theory, some welfare scholars have grafted citizenship theory onto the concept of rights. This approach limits the scope of welfare claims to specific communities, where individuals enjoy certain benefits based on their membership. This transforms a universalist view of welfare into a particularist one. T.H. Marshall distinguished three types of citizenship: legal citizenship, which includes traditional rights such as freedom of expression, property rights, and equality before the law; political citizenship, covering political rights in a democratic state; and social citizenship, which grants the right to certain resources. The rationale behind citizenship is its ability to integrate all individuals into a society, but this idea seems too vague to meet the strictness implied by the concept of universal justice.
A certain welfare theory justifies welfare using the concept of "solidarity," arguing that a society's welfare cannot be reduced to the happiness individuals experience through their own efforts and contributions. Instead, it encompasses a complex fusion of rationality and communal sentiment. Individuals living in a society receive an economic "rent," as without social cooperation, their income would be lower. Therefore, welfare is a form of "compensation" derived from collective resources. Another welfare philosophy emphasizes equality itself, not by justifying necessary inequalities in society and the economy, nor by identifying and eliminating objective needs, but by advocating for equality for its own sake. However, equality-oriented welfare concepts also face conflicts: liberals appreciate the egalitarianism of markets, believing that perfectly competitive markets are highly equal, while collectivists emphasize the state's role in promoting equality. Beyond classical liberals, other schools of thought have contributed to welfare state theory, such that by the mid-20th century, the concept of welfare had almost become synonymous with the concept of the welfare state. Many believe that the responsibility for promoting welfare lies entirely with the state. It should be noted that the author criticizes the idea of linking welfare to state welfare. He argues that the sources of welfare are diverse, coming not only from voluntary organizations, churches, and other entities but also from the market itself, with the state being a latecomer to this. Clearly, while the author does not oppose the state providing certain welfare benefits, he maintains a skeptical attitude toward the state, hoping to further explore the welfare value of markets and communities rather than relying too heavily on the state.
In contemporary Western societies, this view of welfare tends to align with new right-wing perspectives, which Chinese readers may approach with a critical eye. Additionally, the author's discussion of welfare theory is conducted within the framework of Western liberal political economy, with little mention of welfare practices in public policy under other institutional forms. This inevitably leads to narrow and biased perspectives, which is clearly related to the author's Western background. At the same time, there are other points in the text that differ from our own views. All these aspects hope that readers will exercise discernment and criticism, uphold correct principles, and make appropriate judgments while reading.