Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Sources of extracts
- Introduction
- Part 1 The family, poverty and population
- Part 2 The ‘welfare state’
- Part 3 Redistribution, universality and inequality
- Part 4 Power, policy and privilege
- Part 5 International and comparative dimensions
- Part 6 The subject of social policy
- Bibliography
- Index
one - The international perspective
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 January 2022
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Sources of extracts
- Introduction
- Part 1 The family, poverty and population
- Part 2 The ‘welfare state’
- Part 3 Redistribution, universality and inequality
- Part 4 Power, policy and privilege
- Part 5 International and comparative dimensions
- Part 6 The subject of social policy
- Bibliography
- Index
Summary
One belief, more than any others, is responsible for the slaughter of individuals on the altars of the great historical ideals – justice or progress or the happiness of future generations, or the sacred mission or emancipation of a nation or race or class, or even liberty itself, which demands the sacrifice of individuals for the freedom of society. This is the belief that somewhere, in the past or in the future, in divine revelation or in the mind of an individual thinker, in the pronouncements of history or science, or in the simple heart of an uncorrupted good man, there is a final solution. This ancient faith rests on the conviction that all the positive values in which men have believed must, in the end, be compatible, and perhaps even entail one another. (Berlin, 1969, p 167)
Not all good things are compatible, still less are all the ideals of mankind. This is as true in the realm of social policy as in other areas of human life. What is social policy? Can a distinction be made between social policy and economic policy?
We live in an age of ‘the great simplifiers’ brought into being, in part, by the mass consumption society. The simplifiers are dominated by the mass media of the press and particularly of television. They must see everything in terms of black versus white and present polarised conflict as entertainment: the universalists versus the selectivists, the spoon-fed versus the independent, or individual choice versus the rationing state.
Many reasons can be given for the simplification, trivialisation and denigration of political and moral issues. How far do editors lose control of their star reporters after they have built them up? How far do the promotion and rewards of journalists (no longer anonymous) depend more than ever on the presentation of scandal and violence, such as student violence. How far does audience rating encourage the presentation of serious issues as trivial entertainment? How far does the fear of loss of advertising revenue limit criticism of the private market? Is this why scandal about government is so much more newsworthy than scandal about the private sector?
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Welfare and WellbeingRichard Titmuss' Contribution to Social Policy, pp. 175 - 184Publisher: Bristol University PressPrint publication year: 2001