Theories in Social Policy

The most cardinal manner in which societal policy can frequently exaccerbate instead than cut down racial inequality is through its dependance upon values, constructs and political orientations that are anterior to and hence non brooding of existent conditions of racial descrimination, tensenesss and inequality ( Blakemore, 2003: 17-39 ) . This is possibly most obvious in the instance of attacks to societal policy that are based upon useful rules. For the useful belief in administering goods and services upon the premiss of catering for the greatest good/happiness of the greatest figure may neglect to distinguish societal demands or it may favor the demands of the bulk cultural population. Another illustration, argueably, is the Marxian attack to societal policy. The Marxian construct of equality tends to cut down inequality to its economic conditions and hence fails to properly recognise that cultural marginalization can go on even when there is greater ’economic’ equality. To be certain these two attacks are seldom employed to steer societal policy in modern-day societies.

However, more recent political orientations or theories can be said to be likewise obviating of race equality. These argueably include the new right attack and even, as I shall explicate subsequently, the so called Third Way attack.During the period of the post-war consensus, from 1945 to the late 1970’s societal policy in Britain was guided by ‘welfarism ‘ . The original motive for the development of the public assistance province in Britain, after the 2nd universe war, was to honor the working categories and returning soldiers for their part to the war and to counterbalance for the desolation brought approximately by the war. It was chiefly designed hence for the benifit of the white British working categories ( Alcock, 2003: 291 ) . This is evidenced by the observation that the redistributive rules of the public assistance province were predominately economic – that the simple proviso of free instruction, wellness attention, public lodging and societal security could relieve inequality.However the public assistance model for societal policy during this period did non merely prevent racial inequality it exaccerbated it. This was to some extent because its rules were developed prior to a period of important in-migration into Britain.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

Thus, for illustration, the immigrant communities would really frequently non hold paid adequate national insurance to claim pension benefits ( Alcock: 291 ) . Furthermore1immigrants who arrived into Britain were forced to travel into private, rented adjustment because there were already drawn-out waiting lists for council adjustment. Not merely was this more dearly-won it besides meant than immigrants would hold small pick but to travel into really hapless quality lodging run by unscupulous landlards in already deprived countries.

In add-on to the racialist bitterness amongst those who saw the public assistance province as a safety cyberspace for the more ‘deserving’ white working categories, the fold of immigrant communities in socially deprived countries contributed to a moral force of racism, segregation, marginalization and inequality.In the 1960’s and 70’s there was some acknowledgment of the marginalization of cultural minorities but this was through ‘integrationist’ policies. This took the signifier, for illustration, of kids from minorities being dispersed in different countries, which meant that they were frequently placed in low watercourse categories and frequently labelled as ‘educationally sub-normal’ ( Shukra et Al: 2004: 4 )The Thatcherite, new right attack to societal policy faired no better than the old state-centred public assistance system. The new right attack was twin-fold, underscoring societal order on the one manus and deregulating on the other. In societal policy footings this meant an attempt to interrupt what was called the ‘dependency culture’ created by the public assistance province that, it was argued, kept people within the public assistance system because it de-motivated them from happening work and supplying for themselves.

The attendant toughening of claim processs may hold had the consequence of doing it harder for cultural minorities to claim benefits, particularly so because of increased intuition about colored peoples eligibility, therefore go forthing many colored groups to fend for themselves sometimes illicitly. Furthermore the tightening of public assistance claimant processs might hold disproportionately disadvantaged afro-Carribean and Asiatic groups. This whole attack, it could be argued, farther exaccerbated racialist bitterness and therefore racial descrimination in employment.However, the new right attack to societal policy was non across-the-board during the 1980’s and 1990’s. Local councils and societal attention professionals frequently operated harmonizing to a different set of rules, sometimes in calculated resistance to the1docket of cardinal authorities. One avenue of practical resistance to the racialist effects of societal policy was multiculturalism, which is grounded in the belief that different cultural civilizations should be regarded as every bit valid.

The job with multiculturalism nevertheless was that it emphasised the jubilation of difference and tolerance but did non efficaciously address issues of racial force and racial favoritism ( Shukra et Al: 4 ) . It besides led to further racial tenseness because it led others to believe that more was being done for colored communities. And racial tenseness, it could be argued, leads to racial inequality for those from minority groups.

Since 1997 the Labour authorities have pursued what has been termed a ‘Third Way’ attack to societal policy. In practical policy footings this attack has been realised with an accent on societal justness, undertaking societal exclusion and making societal coherence. The credibleness of labour’s record on undertaking societal exclusion has of class been questioned but their accent on societal coherence is likely more controversial. This is because it promotes an assimilationist attack through citizenship instruction that some might see as racialist because it encourages immigrant populations to absorb to the dominant white civilization. However, it is hard to turn out that this and other Labour policies have had the specific consequence of worsening racial inequality. They may hold had this affect indirectly in that the failure to right racial inequality is besides to worsen it by leting it to ferment.

However, this is different from the more direct links that could be drawn between societal policy and racial inequality in the post-war period.BibliographyAlcock, P ( 2003 )Social Policy in Britain, MacmillanBlakemore, K ( 2003 )Social Policy: an debut, Open University PressBlakemore, K ( 2003a )The Students comrade to Social PolicyBlackwellShukra, K et al ‘Race, Social Cohesion and the Changing Politics of Citizenship’ inLondon Review of Education, vol 2, No.3, November 20041