How Liberalism ideology relates to social work
How Liberalism ideology relates to social work practice
The history and influence of Liberalism is a complex issue, and understanding social work practice involves penetrating a vast nexus of theoretical and practical socio-political factors. Nevertheless, addressing the specific question of how Liberalism relates to social work practice reveals important and distinct points for discussion. In this essay I will outline the historical developments of Liberalism and highlight the core beliefs and how they influence social work. I aim to argue that exposing the liberal ideological values inherent in social work opens up latent tensions to debate. The tensions in liberal political theory and the concomitant problems for social work don’t call for abandonment of Liberalism ideology because it has as its basis the appropriate capacity for renewal. These debates should stimulate reappraisal and reform and increase our capacity to influence the social, political and economic determinants of social care. This can be achieved due to – not in spite of – the underlying principles of Liberalism.
The historical development of Liberalism
While the editors of the Spanish Constitution in 1812 were the first to use the noun liberal in a political sense, the war of independence in America established the first nation to craft a constitution based on Liberalism. This new creed originated in the political philosophy of the previous three hundred years. Liberalism emerged from the breakdown of feudalism, the growth of market capitalism and the rise of the middle class. Liberals sought to expose the immorality of authoritarianism and limit government powers in order to safeguard civil liberties.
Where early Liberals sought total non-intervention, modern liberals endorse involved governance on issues such as welfare, education and healthcare. This has led to a split between the early classical Liberalism and the modern form which dominates contemporary politics today. Nevertheless, classical and modern Liberalism share core beliefs which point to underlying principles. These principles perpetuate every aspect of contemporary life in Western political systems. Ideas such as individualism, tolerance and economic freedom are central to the western political ideology of our times.
The core beliefs of Liberalism
‘As political beings it is our business to free human life from as many as possible of its difficulties’ (Mill Principles of political philosophy in collected works II p.943)
Liberalism holds that individuals are the locus of moral consideration, and securing individual freedom is paramount. An extreme form of liberal individualism; atomism holds that the individual is central to socio-political theory or practice, ontologically prior to society, egotistic, self seeking and self reliant. Modern Liberalism has a more optimistic bent in its understanding of social responsibility and mutual respect. Political Liberalism stresses the social contract[1], under which citizens make the laws and agree to abide by those laws. It is based on the belief that individuals know best what is best for them. This is the characteristic theme of liberal ideology, and ideas of justice and freedom stem from the primacy of the individual.
Rationalism[2] greatly influenced the liberal concept of an individual. The idea of a rational man was an important precursor to social non-intervention, as the rational man is capable of defining and pursuing his own path in society, rendering the idea of a paternal government unnecessary. Modern liberals appreciate the inequality of self reliance and seek to strike a balance between intervention and decentralisation.
The emphasis on and openness to reason in liberal societies emanates from the many dichotomies at its heart: On one hand natural man is seen as rational and socially conscious, while on the other egotistic and selfish. One the one hand men are capable on the other needy. This tension in Liberalism is reflected by the fact that is has met with discussion, debate and argument since its inception. A willingness to offer reasoned explanations for its theories is central to liberal ideology.
Liberalism favours neutral government, in that it is not for the state to determine personal values. As John Rawls put it in his Theory of Justice, ‘The state has no right to determine a particular conception of the good life’ (Rawls 1999). The idea of the good life has been used in political philosophy to denote a course of action the rational man takes when in favourable political circumstances. Rawls argues that liberal governments should provide these favourable conditions but never attempt to dictate how citizens should go about the acquisition of happiness. This idea of neutrality is closely connected to tolerance, and in particular the willingness to celebrate political and religious diversity.
Since the developments in economics in the late 18th century Liberals have stressed the importance of a free markets, and seek to limit government intervention in domestic economy and foreign trade. In Andrew Heywood’s words the attraction of classical economics to liberal ideology ‘was that, although each individual is materially self-interested, the economy itself is though to operate according to a set of impersonal pressures – market forces – that tend naturally to promote economic prosperity and well being.’ (Heywood 1987) Modern liberals support government responsibility for health, education, and alleviating poverty yet still call for a market based on independent exchange and tend to believe in decentralisation.
The central tenets of modern Liberalism are the primacy of the individual, freedom, tolerance, a commitment to reason and debate, and a free-market economy. Liberalism is egalitarian; based on principles of democracy, classlessness, equality and openness, and is antonymous to oppressive and tyrannical authoritarianism. Liberalism advocates civil rights for all citizens: establishing justice though the protection and privileges of personal liberty. It includes the equal treatment of all citizens irrespective of race, gender and class. These core beliefs directly influence much of day to day life, but we will focus on the implications for the practice of social work.
Social work and Liberal ideology
Social work is a discipline involving the application of social theory and research methods to societal problems. It incorporates and uses other social sciences and political philosophy as a means to improve the human condition and positively change society’s response to these problems, through understanding and acting upon their causes, solutions and human impacts.
What constitutes a social problem? And what constitutes a solution to a social problem? In the western world the answers to these questions stem from governmental policy based on the principles of Liberalism. In a modern liberal society a social problem is one that contradicts the core liberal principles. A solution is that which removes the restrictions to people flourishing. For these reasons ideology implicit in societal interactions effects what we know as social problems and solutions.
Poverty and alienation are profound social problems and major causes of suffering in modern society. Taking poverty, Liberalism ideology believes that every individual should have the freedom to succeed economically, and not live in poverty. We have seen already that while early Liberals emphasised non-intervention, modern liberals endorse more involved governance on issues such as welfare. This reflects a central tension in the practical applicability of Liberalism ideology highlighted by Maureen Ramsey in her book what’s wrong with Liberalism? ‘Since both forms of Liberalism endorse private ownership, the economic redistribution required to tackle poverty will inevitable infringe particular individual rights to liberty’ (1997, pg66). The emphasis on individual liberty and progress at the heart of liberal capitalist economies has been accused of perpetuating this tension. Furthermore, welfare as a concept contradicts the moral neutrality that is central to the principle of tolerance in Liberalism. By providing a range of services designed to bring about the public good the state is making judgements about what is good, beyond the self seeking satisfaction of subjective desires. This leads Ramsey to conclude that ‘the provision of welfare [is] at odds with basic liberal assumptions’ (pg, 66).
Examples from social work where the right to escape poverty is being restricted could include a daughter being held back from going to school to work for her parents, or a wife not being permitted to work. Social workers’ ability to address these problems is influenced by the traditional liberal distinction between the public and the private spheres by which liberal governments should only function in the public sphere, excluding the activities of family life. Modern liberals attempt to strike a balance between intervention and non intervention. However, because of the tensions concerning the private sphere, political neutrality and accountability, this balance remains problematic. Many agree with Pateman that these restrictions render care ineffective and the areas of social work that can deal with poverty are too limited.[3] ‘Precisely because Liberalism conceptualises civil society in abstraction from ascriptive domestic life, the latter remains forgotten.’ (Pateman, 1987 p. 107)
The liberal legacy of limited intervention and reason has resulted in an often debilitating caution concerning social work, even in the more extreme areas of its application. Taking the examples of ‘baby p’ and Victoria Climbie the social services have been accused of being too optimistic about the intentions of citizens and missing the signs that could have helped them avoid such awful tragedies.[4] However, intuitions support the distance between the private and the public spheres. The idea of children being taken away from their parents is invariably seen as a last resort, a relaxation of this attitude may have saved many children, but it may also create other awful situations in which children are taken away from good families. It would demand more care and attention to complex detail than necessary for our purposes here to question the role of political ideology in these terrible events.
Alienation is another complicated issue facing modern liberal society. Liberal ideology does not have a core belief connected with the negativity of isolation because of an understanding of human nature that emphasises the priority of the individual. This is often seen as a deficiency as many hold that the intuitions constructed by Liberalism have produced a situation where individuals have shallower relations with other people than they would normally. This, it is argued, leads to difficulties in understanding and adapting to each other’s uniqueness. This points to another of the tensions within Liberalism: it promotes tolerance but through its emphasis on individual freedom encourages isolation. Many sociologists are concerned about the alienating effects of modernization, describing how relationships become mediated through money because economic freedom is considered an essential element of individual liberty. This has also been accused of contributing to the loss of primary relationships such as familial bonds in favour of goal oriented secondary relationships.
The concepts of the private sphere, individual freedom, tolerance and political neutrality greatly affect what we deem to be within the role of a social worker. The balance between intervention and personal freedom rests as precariously now as any time since Mill. Free market capitalism is at its weakest in decades, giving new impetus to the charge that economic Liberalism is guilty of creating a more selfish society where the pursuit of personal wealth is more destructive that constructive.
Is liberal ideology repressive?
Liberalism is accused of repressing positive aspects of human nature. To call Liberal ideology repressive though, is extreme. Liberalism allows for repressive forces to emerge due to its emphasis on individual liberty and freedom of speech and thought, but allowing repressive tendencies to emerge is not adhering to them, and liberal societies should not be blamed for the emergence of alternative ideologies within them. Social and corporate responsibility are genuine possibilities in liberal society and are prevalent in modern liberal theory.
There are problems with Liberalism, but I suggest they do not serve as aspects of a repressive ideology. We ought to remember that Liberalism emerged from the compassionate desire to eradicate authoritarian rule in order to secure freedom for every man. This is a noble aspiration with compassion for all at its core. As industrialisation and free market economies took over, the role of welfare in liberal states became important because of the same aspirations, to help every single person in a society. The change from non-intervention to intervention evidences the claim that ideologies have to adapt to contexts, and this is where Liberalism has a unique quality, a profound capacity for renewal. The classic versus modern Liberalism debate could only occur in the climate of discussion debate and argument that defined the rationalist movement. The tensions in Liberalism were inherited from this theoretical foundation and have maintained their capacity for renewal. The tensions in Liberalism reflect the scope for continual reappraisal, it is not dogmatic, and is open to public scrutiny through the democratic process. Challenges are being made and listened to within liberal society. For example, the Social liberals[5] introduced scepticism concerning the idea of free markets, seeing unrestricted trade as leading to the growth of multi-national corporations and the concentration of wealth and power in the hands of the few, seen as contradicting the intention of liberty for all.
These socially responsible tendencies are not entirely new editions to liberal theory and in fact are latent in political Liberalism. While the early Liberals like Locke saw liberty as a natural right, Liberalism has never held that the entitlement to freedom is absolute. In On Liberty ([1859] 1972, p.73) Mill argued that ‘power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilised community… [If it]… is to prevent harm from others’. Liberalism emerged as a move away from blind adherence to political dogma based on static views of a divine ordered reality, towards a scientific and compassionate concern for every citizen. To conclude that Liberalism must involve repression is excessive given the underlying desire to stand for the opposite.
Conclusion.
The practice of social work in modern liberal society rests on liberal principles. By locating the connections between social work and Liberalism ideology, we have seen how practical social knowledge is influenced by liberal philosophical assumptions. These central tenets of Liberalism are liberty, tolerance, and a free-market economy. These core beliefs affect all areas of social life, including social work. The tensions that permeate the practices of liberal governments are present in the field of social work and valuable indicators of the complexity of the issues social workers face. Crucially, they are open to reform.
There are deep social problems in liberal society, of which poverty and alienation are paramount. What we can learn from these problems is that if Liberalism will succeed in its aspirations it needs to expand its scope to include more social and corporate responsibility, and a greater understanding of community. The emphasis on the individual, particularly in the economic brand of Liberalism, can repress aspects of human nature that seem central to the compassion and egalitarianism that motivated the creation of liberal theories. If empathy and care are a consequence of our social nature then we need an account of the individual as interdependent, opposed to the atomised individual of classic liberal theory.
The tensions in liberal political theory and the concomitant problems for social work don’t call for abandonment of Liberalism ideology because it has as its basis the appropriate mechanisms to progress: democracy and education, the capacity for renewal and the compassionate aspiration to secure freedom. They call for reappraisal and reform.
Bibliography
Political Ideologies an introduction Heywood, Andrew. Palgrave 1992
Liberalism and modern society Bellamy, Richard. Polity press 1992
What’s wrong with Liberalism Ramsay, Maureen. Leicester University Press 1997
A Theory of Justice revised edition Rawls, John. OUP 1999
After Virtue MacIntyre, Alasdair. Duckworth 1981
Feminist critiques of the public/private dichotomy in Feminism and inequality Phillips A (ed) Blackwell 1987.
1
