Mending Society with Sticky Tape

Over the past few days the Tories' "Social Justice" Policy group, headed by former Tory leader Iain Duncan-Smith (who I met once at the Lostock Hall "Conservative" Club a few years ago when I still thought they were useful- how wrong was I) has produced a huge 671 page report on the ills of society and policies to remedy them. The key points can be seen below:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6287914.stm

Most of the attention has been focused upon the report's support of marriage in the form of tax breaks. The report rightly points out that children from a married household are less likely to commit crime, do drugs or be unemployed and do better academically; the unmasking of this manifest truth has provoked anger in the leftist relativist corner who believe all form of lifstyle choice to be legitimate. The report also affirms that the family is the building block of society and should be the focus of policy to heal society of its rather long list of woes. However despite a good anaylsis of the problem the solution does not tackle the root problem; it is similar in some respects to The Death of the West by Pat Buchanan.

The destruction of marriage, the family and society can almost solely be blamed on the state: in particular the welfare state. It is not a coincidence that since the German pioneered welfare state has been in existence the family has become a weaker and weaker institution. On a side note the state provision of welfare was first introduced in the Elizabethan era because that Church was no longing giving alms to the poor; the reason for this is that Henry VIII stole the monasteries. Where the state does more, the Church and family (nuclear and extended) do less. This can be seen on a purely economic analysis:

In the absence of state provision traditional marriage would come to the fore as the common type of family set up for the main reason that it affords the greatest financial stability than any other form for the following reasons: firstly a marriage contract commits the two parties to life long companionship (contractual stability whereas cohabitation has none); this then makes it conducive for child rearing since the contract is not intended to be ended; ending the contract (note at this point the state has made easier), this would only be possible if the Church or other institution sanctioned it- normally only allowed under limited proscibed circumstances-, requires a cost normally falling upon the man to provide income for his former wife while she looked after children.

Now what incentives does the welfare state introduce: Well for starters where people used to wait to get married to have children they no longer have to because they know that the state will bail them out; if you’re a “poor” single mum they’ll give you a council flat (sorry social(ist) housing). But not only that, but the child’s education and health needs will also be provided by the state and in some, cases, income support for the mother and the child’s day to day needs. It even does not stop there: you get a reward for every time you produce another one. No longer are these things needed to be paid for; the benevolent state with its unlimited resources (i.e. stolen money and counterfeited (fiat) money) will do it for me. Even cohabitation, due to the current “benefit system”, now makes more financial sense than marriage again artificially increasing the incidence of a less stable structure.

In short the welfare state shifts the costs of individual’s actions onto other people thus making them more irresponsible. More children are born to the feckless and foolish than they otherwise would, thus cause a lot of the problems we see to day. Further and more insidiously the bailing out by the state replaces the normal guardians of financial stability- fathers. With their financial responsibility gone, so does there parenting responsibility which leaves them to indulge in their whims. This then leads to an unbalanced upbringing causing a lot of the problems of young men today.

For an in depth analysis read James Bartholomew’s excellent The Welfare State We’re In

So what has been shown is that it is again the state that has caused the problem and it is now attempting to disguise itself as the solution again. As to the proposals, any tax cut should be supported; as for the rest it will be purely ineffectual at best. Only the entire abolition of the welfare state will solve this and many other problems; as long as it exists these problems will be perpetuated.