I don’t agree with this at all. In most traditional societies, families and communities look after those among them in need. You can ask the government to write cheques to take people out of poverty but you can’t replace the love and care that families and communities offer. - ThreadSky

thechurchmouse.bsky.social • 76 days ago

I don’t agree with this at all. In most traditional societies, families and communities look after those among them in need. You can ask the government to write cheques to take people out of poverty but you can’t replace the love and care that families and communities offer.

Reposted from Charlotte Lydia Riley

“And yet there is something inescapably bleak about a Britain that relies on philanthropy to tackle its social and economic problems.” www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...

Comments

padrewill.wales•76 days ago

I don't think it's either/or. You're absolutely right about the love and care, and I think there will always be room and requirement for that. At the same time, governments can be mean. (Witness the US healthcare system as the stereotypical and correct example.) Or they can choose to be generous.

yrieithydd.bsky.social•76 days ago

But that isn't the other option. Clement is talking about charity deciding whether you are deserving enough. I'm thinking of An Inspector Calls

thechurchmouse.bsky.social•76 days ago

I think the state makes that distinction far more than charities do

yrieithydd.bsky.social•76 days ago

These days maybe. But that's because the sort of people who ran charities write in the newspapers and scaremonger and limit it. What we have now is not Atlee's vision.

turkeyplucker.bsky.social•76 days ago

Or indeed charity deciding whether it feels like it at all this week.

harveymayne.bsky.social•76 days ago

Examples of such traditional societies, Mouse? Would they be those from countries that don't have a welfare state? The problem, as I see it, is that modern western society is no longer structured to allow communities to take on that responsibility. Indeed, what even are communities these days?

thechurchmouse.bsky.social•76 days ago

Not at all - traditional communities (e.g. rural) in the UK still look like this in many places.

nptn32.bsky.social•76 days ago

I think you are missing the point being made. In reality govt relies on families and communities supporting those in need and as long as that happens they can turn a blind eye to tax avoidance The rich isolate themselves from such communities.

raquelitae.bsky.social•76 days ago

But often the sticking point is where their families and communities do not welcome/approve of ppl, right? (asylum seekers, LGBTQ people in unaffirming communities) Then they don’t have the option of relying on those networks, so they (still, now) turn to strangers, because they have to help them.

thechurchmouse.bsky.social•76 days ago

Indeed - I’m not suggesting no welfare of safety net. I’m rejecting the idea that every time a charity helps it = a government failure.

lottelydia.bsky.social•75 days ago

But people should not be in the sort of poverty that requires charitable assistance. That is why charity is a government failure: because government has created the conditions in which charities need to operate.

raquelitae.bsky.social•76 days ago

Ok. But surely it is a failure if charities know that they are what’s keeping people from falling through increasingly big holes in the net - because it means the net is not working? So it’s the reliance only on charities

raquelitae.bsky.social•76 days ago

Which again are not going to have the means to reach everyone that a state can.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply