Affiliation:
1. Department of Politics, Philosophy and Religion, Lancaster University , Lancaster , United Kingdom
Abstract
Abstract
This article presents an immanent critique of neoliberal welfare reform using observation of participatory research involving left-behind communities in the North East of England and Australia. It argues that harms, such as passivity, invoked to reduce social security and increase conditionality are actually enhanced by austerity, conditionality and philanthropic giving. Deploying Mauss’ conception of the gift suggests that aggressive, conditional giving, combined with consumption through indebtedness, has served to strip individuals of authority. This leads to a radical conclusion: the stated aims of policy platforms like Big Society can only be realized through statutory entitlements like basic income.
Subject
General Social Sciences,General Arts and Humanities
Reference84 articles.
1. Adams, Tony E., et al. “Autoethnography.” Accessed 12 Sept. 2023, pp. 1–11. doi: 10.1002/9781118901731.iecrm0011.
2. Afscharian, Dominic, Viktoriia Muliavka, Marius S. Ostrowski, and Lukáš Siegel. “The State of the UBI Debate: Mapping the Arguments for and against UBI.” Basic Income Studies, vol. 17, no. 2, 2022, pp. 213–237. doi: 10.1515/bis-2021-0030.
3. Appleton, Roger. “Precariousness.” 2016. https://vimeo.com/129011567.
4. Bailey, David J. and Saori Shibata. “Austerity and Anti-Austerity: The Political Economy of Refusal in ‘Low-Resistance’ Models of Capitalism.” British Journal of Political Science, vol. 49, no. 2, 2019, pp. 683–709. doi: 10.1017/S0007123416000624.
5. Barnard, Hilary. “Big Society, Cuts & Consequences.” 2010. https://www.cass.city.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/37264/BigSocietyCutsandConsequences.pdf.
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献