The Welfare State was founded on the back of world War Two, when the British Labour Party won a surprising landslide in the general election, however, the early formations of the Welfare State, were not created by the Labour Party, but, by the Liberal Party.
The Liberal Parties part in creating the Welfare State, is commonly refereed to as 'The Liberal Reforms'. The Liberal Reforms happened from the period of 1906 to 1914. They started off with free school meals for children, in 1906. In 1908 the first serious protection of children became law; it meant that people were punished for harming, or neglecting children, thanks to the Childrens Charter. In the same year, the first state pensions were created. This meant that those over 70 could claim a state pension, and reports of old pensioners collecting their pensions saying, ''God Bless Lloyd George.'' By 1911, the Welfare State as we know it today began to take route, with the first unemployment benefits, and state health care. This was through 'The National Insurance Act'. In the same year, parliament became more open, and democratic, as working men were, for the first time, allowed to stand as an MP in parliament. However, even though technically men (and now women), have been allowed to be a representative, it is still, and has always been one of the most classicist, and elite places to work in in the United Kingdom. Even to this day. That, and money is a barrier to standing as an MP, or particularly as a small party, or an independent party, which shows that the House of Commons is still, largely, undemocratic.
Click to set custom HTML
The Liberal Reforms though paved the way for a more democratic, and fair society, for several reasons. One of the most obvious, and politically motivated reasons why the Liberal Party choose to bring in the Liberal Reforms, was because of an ever growing stronger Labour Party. The Labour Party was attracting working class, and poor voters because of their welfare policies. This was to see them gain 42 seats from the Liberal Party in the 1910 general election.
Another reason why the Liberal Party was forced to act, was because of Seebhom Rowntree's study of York, in 1901. It found that at least 28% of people did not have sufficient money to live off. Before the establishment of the Welfare State, people were poor, very poor. If you were sick, the were no free medical care. If you lost your job, or couldn't find one, you had no social security to fall back on. There were basically no workers rights; and children worked. Streets were filthy, poverty rife. Slums were common, dangerous, and dirty. Only were they pulled down with the Welfare States formation in 1945. Without a Welfare State, the country was poorer, not richer (unless, you were born extremely lucky). Those who had nothing, were often forced to work in workhouses (or poorhouses).
The Workhouse was essentially an open door prison, you didn't need to be there, but, without a home, a job, what choice did they have?
Poorhouses were there was essentially no rights, no autonomy, you were essentially a slave making someone else very rich. Charles Dickens Oliver Twist, captures the mood of the Poorhouses perfectly - a place run by rich bullies. Poverty was seen as an ''undesirable'' trait to have in Victorian Britain (now where have I heard that one before - ''the deserving poor'' and ''undeserving poor'', perhaps?). With establishment of the Welfare State in 1945 it made society more equal, not perfect, but, it turned the country around to give giver more equality, and protection for the poor, and working man. Much of what we have today is thanks to the Welfare State. Our NHS, for example. Although, in it's original formation, it was a lot more widespread; as eye care, and dental care was also covered as free at the point of use. However, since it's inception, the NHS has been shrinking, and even privatized, especially under Thatcher in the 1980s. Although, she is not the only one guilty of failing the NHS. All leading parties have diverted money away from the NHS, and into the hands of private health companies; the Tories, Labour, and SNP, all have - which means funds are being directed away from where they are desperately needed.
The NHS is not the only part of the Welfare State which has suffered at the hands of recent governments, the protection for the unemployed has increasingly suffered. Only 1% of the entire welfare bill is spent on unemployed benefits, yet, it has seen the most cuts (I guess when pensioners are your core voters, and the reason you get elected, you don't want to rock their boat!). Though cutting benefits doesn't solve problems, it creates other problems, such as higher crime rates - which costs the country money.
Ensuring that people are even further in poverty, without benefits doesn't help the country, and certainly not the people on benefits any richer. If you want to make the country richer, and people better off, then make education free, like in Scotland, and then by the time people are in employment they pay more into the country, through higher taxes. The Welfare State has only been a great asset to Britain, perhaps not perfect, but which have helped many people get out of power. Ironically, the people who have benefited the most from the Welfare State, pensioners, are the ones who are voting for it now to be destroyed. That's nice, kicking away the ladder for other generations. However, to be fair, it is not solely pensioners, it seems the British hobby these days is to dismantle, and destroy the Welfare State. Yet, the Welfare State benefits us all. Everyone is one paycheck away from being unemployed. So, when you contribute to taking an axe to the Welfare State, think of the fact that you are taking an axe to a safety net for yourself, and your family.
0 Comments
Studying, or learning about history is fun, but, it is also important. It teaches us about our past, humanities past, and can also give us clues about our future, or, what can happen if past events play out in the present.
If we are observant, and learn from history, then we can avoid making the same mistakes as our ancestors did. We can learn why we do what we do, e.g. why we have certain customs, traditions, holidays, and religions. We can learn and understand more about subjects like anthropology, sociology, and philosophy - as all the social sciences over lap each other, in one way or another. History, like anthropology, sociology, politics, and philosophy, should make us reflect on our societies, religions, customs, and traditions, it should make us question them, and it should make us reflect and ask ourselves if certain customs, traditions, religions, and so on, are really things which we should be practicing, or are they archaic, outdated, and irrelevant now. Reading history can help us learn about the wrong doings, and evils, done by humanity. Some in the name of religion, some in the name of politics, and some even in the name of atheism. Often religion has a free pass from criticism, yet, some of histories most atrocious activities have been carried out in the name of religion. Religion is an idea (set of ideas), it should be as accountable to criticism as any political belief. When immoral, or evil behavior is carried out, whether it is in the name of religion, or political ideology, the criticism should be the same. History should teach us that inappropriate ideas or practices should be condemn, no matter the guise it takes. To not be able to criticism ideas, political or religious, is when you have censorship, and even turning a blind eye to wrong doing. If history teaches us anything, it's that when we turn a blind eye, and fail to criticism ideas, practices, that are wrong, we create monsters, violence, and the persecution of people to have the freedom of thought, and the challenging of ideas, and beliefs. It's like what happened with Socrates, who was killed (or, forced suicide), for ''corrupting the youth'', through ideas, and challenging ideas, and thoughts. Philosophy is not history, but history should often be philosophy. In that we should be open, and free of thought. Unguided in thought. We should be allowed to be openly critical of any idea, or thought, regardless of the format it comes in. If you have an idea, thought, or ideology, surely it must be justifiable, and moral. Too often in the politically correct world, we are not allowed to challenge ideas, or beliefs, especially when they are religious, because we might ''offened'' people. Yet, challenging ideas, ideologies, is the only thing that has progressed society. Censorship of thought, and ideas, can often mean that things such as history can be fabricated, leaving the history to be either left out, or totally untrue. An example of that would be the history of the Native Americans, and how it is sometimes stated that the native were wiped out by diseases, and not genocide. Obviously with incoming Europeans, diseases would have killed Native Americas. It would be like going to the Rainforest of South America today, an uncontacted tribe would be deadly to them. However, clearly what happened in America through colonization was largely down to genocide, and not accidental. It could be regarded as ''offensive'' to report, and comment that genocide largely killed off the Native Americans, yet, in refusing to acknowledge that, and keep documentation of that is even more insulting, and wrong. It also means that we are refusing to document on what actually happened in those historical events, with a fabrication, a lie. History is important, because it shows use the dangers of censorship. And censorship is at odds with free thought, science, philosophy, social sciences, and history. |
Archives
April 2023
Categories
All
← Resize me
|