Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of tables and figures
- Acknowledgements
- one Introduction
- two Unequal citizenship? The new social divisions of public welfare
- three Lived experiences of poverty and prosperity in austerity Britain
- four The sociological imagination of rich and poor citizens
- five Heterodox citizens? Conceptions of social rights and responsibilities
- six Identity, difference and citizenship: a fraying tapestry?
- seven Deliberating the structural determinants of poverty and inequality
- eight Conclusion
- Appendix: Details of the qualitative fieldwork
- References
- Index
four - The sociological imagination of rich and poor citizens
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 08 April 2022
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of tables and figures
- Acknowledgements
- one Introduction
- two Unequal citizenship? The new social divisions of public welfare
- three Lived experiences of poverty and prosperity in austerity Britain
- four The sociological imagination of rich and poor citizens
- five Heterodox citizens? Conceptions of social rights and responsibilities
- six Identity, difference and citizenship: a fraying tapestry?
- seven Deliberating the structural determinants of poverty and inequality
- eight Conclusion
- Appendix: Details of the qualitative fieldwork
- References
- Index
Summary
In truth, poverty is an anomaly to rich people. It is very difficult to make out why people who want dinner do not ring the bell. (Walter Bagehot, 1858)
The raw stuff processed by the sociological imagination is human experience. (Zygmunt Bauman, 2005: 123)
Introduction
Overall, the general public tend to oppose excessive inequality and support a degree of redistribution as a matter of principle (Coughlin, 1980; Kumlin, 2007; Curtice, 2017). However, differences in welfare attitudes are clearly observable between institutional regimes, ideological systems and sociodemographic groups (Wlezien and Soroka, 2012; Kulin and Seymer, 2014; Wu and Chou, 2015). A range of factors contribute towards attitudinal divergence within and across socioeconomic groups, but existing research (particularly quantitative analysis) has tended to explain this through self-interested rationalities (Iversen and Soskice, 2001; Linos and West, 2003; Cusack et al, 2006; Lelkes, 2009).
Specifically, when it comes to welfare attitudes and policy preferences, sociological and political science research has tended to suggest that ‘rational, informed individuals behave in a way that maximises their utility functions’ (Sumino, 2014: 111). This is perhaps unsurprising given the substantial evidence that ‘richer people are more averse to redistribution’ and that lower-income individuals are much more likely to problematise inequality and support welfare provision (Hasenfeld and Rafferty, 1989; Park et al, 2007; Alesina and Giuliano, 2009: 3). These attitudinal differences might be described as self-interested given the material position of citizens (for example, Evans and de Graaf, 2013; Naumann et al, 2015). Equally, support for policies or principles that may not work in the material interests of participants may be characterised as altruistic (Feldman and Zaller, 1992; Papadakis and Bean, 1993; Groskind, 1994; Van Oorschot, 2000). However, this is not necessarily the underlying cause of attitudinal difference and conflating material position with self-interest is potentially attributing a causative explanation to the characteristic of an attitude.
While many acknowledge how ‘class relations generate a matrix of differential life chances and possession of economic assets’, there is a tendency to overlook or presume how this might feature in explanations of attitudinal divergence (Brooks and Svallfors, 2010: 208).
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Welfare, Inequality and Social CitizenshipDeprivation and Affluence in Austerity Britain, pp. 67 - 96Publisher: Bristol University PressPrint publication year: 2018