Welfare Politics - The criticism that Marxism presents against Beveridge's welfare

Extract

[...] He recommended a flat rate of contribution be paid by all men during their working years so that after their retirement or interruption of work such as in the case of an accident, sickness and unemployment, they will get the same subsistence level of benefit. With this plan even after a person stopped working, they would still have the same (Beveridge 1942 par. 265). In part four of the report, the social security budget is extensively discussed. Beveridge (1942 par. 267) states that "in addition to social insurance, the plan for social security involves the provision of other services which must be taken into account in framing a social security budget". [...]

[...] All the same, the report set the stage for addressing pertinent issues of human welfare (Harris 2004, p. 291). Marxist Perspective on Welfare Politics and Its Criticism of Beveridge Welfare The Marxism approach to welfare in Britain can be traced way back to 1848 when Karl Max and Fredrick Engels authored the Communist Manifesto (Lavalette & Pratt 2006 p. 46). Marxism's philosophical underpinning was based on understanding the world in its totality as a unified whole. Part of the Marxist focus was to criticize capitalism for the inequalities that it brought about stating that the vast amount of wealth that capitalism creates should be understood as part of the inequalities and poverty that dominate the world. [...]

[...] The other aim is to discuss the Marxism approach to welfare and in doing so analyze the critiques that Marxism presents against Beveridge's welfare. Main Features of Beveridge's Vision of the Welfare State William Beveridge is the founding father of social liberalism and social democratic consensus welfare in the United Kingdom, and by extension to the rest of the world. When the world was on the verge of collapse during the Second World War, Beveridge was working with an interdepartmental committee of civil servants (of which he was the chairman) to understand social insurance (Fraser 2003, p. [...]

[...] These contradictory goals were dabbed by some Marxists of the 1970s as welfare's accumulation and legitimation process. By implementing the welfare reforms, the government gave overlooked the social-economic changes that were increasingly leading many people to become unemployed. The predicament was that even social welfare would not be able to sustain the economy since the ratio between the unemployed and the working class would be so broad. The welfare approach was bound to fail in addressing the much-needed social reform, the result of which, as predicted by MP Quintin Hogg of the conservative party would be a social revolution (Sidney 2014 par. [...]

[...] Last but not least are the political calculations of the ruling class. The Marxists felt that in as much as the social welfare discussions and reforms marked the development of improved living conditions for the working class, its approach would result in class conflict. The consequences of which would be that the untouched are made subject to exploitation (Lavalette & Pratt 2006 p. 46). The Marxist critiqued Beveridge's welfare approach citing that in as much as it supports continued market accumulation it legitimized the power of the capitalist by offering protection to all citizens. [...]