It's tempting to tell a story like:
First societies were cruel to poor people; eventually they invented welfare.
Historically, it is more complicated.
Welfare and punishment often developed together.
The same administrative machinery that identified people who needed assistance could also identify people who were considered undeserving of it.
The state therefore acquired two complementary capacities:
to relieve the vulnerable
and
to discipline the vulnerable.
The distinction between those two functions could be extremely unstable.
That's one reason the history of poor relief is so important for understanding the broader question.
12. There's a striking temporal pattern here
One could describe the historical process like this:
Stage 1 — Misfortune
Someone loses their livelihood, health, home, family, or economic security.
↓
Stage 2 — Dependency
They require assistance from family, charity, community, or state.
↓
Stage 3 — Classification
Institutions ask:
What kind of person is this?
↓
Stage 4 — Moralization
The person's condition becomes associated with character:
industrious / idle
deserving / undeserving
respectable / disreputable
legitimate / illegitimate
↓
Stage 5 — Differential treatment
The classification determines the amount of help, surveillance, freedom, or punishment they receive.
↓
Stage 6 — Feedback
That treatment changes their circumstances.
↓
Stage 7 — Confirmation
Their worsened circumstances are interpreted as evidence that the original classification was correct.
That final step is perhaps the most important.
13. The institution can manufacture the evidence that justifies the institution
Imagine:
- Someone is poor.
- The state regards poor people as potentially idle.
- It puts them into a punitive institution.
- The institution separates them from ordinary society.
- Their employment prospects deteriorate.
- Their family relationships deteriorate.
- Their health deteriorates.
- They emerge poorer and more socially marginal.
- Observers say:
"Look how dysfunctional these people are."
But some of the dysfunction is now a consequence of the treatment itself.
The institution has partly produced the phenomenon it claims merely to manage.
This is a much more profound claim than "the poor were treated badly."
It is:
An institution can transform vulnerability into deviance, and then use the resulting deviance to justify the institution's original treatment.
No comments:
Post a Comment