<p>This chapter argues that the starkest of the institutional problems facing social democr... more <p>This chapter argues that the starkest of the institutional problems facing social democracy now is a growing inability to win elections. Added to this was the challenge of a long-term decline in the industrial wing of social democracy. Historically, social democracy has been the politics of the labour movement, and a key component of this movement has always been trade unions and their members. While that relationship was not always as close as it was in the British or Swedish cases, trade unionism was almost always the 'other half' of social democracy. However, the 1980s were a time of loss for this 'other side' of social democracy. Trade unions were becoming increasingly feminised, more focused in the public sector and drawing in increasing numbers of middle-class public service members.</p>
amounts to an antipolitics. He is particularly sceptical of protestors’ refusal to outline altern... more amounts to an antipolitics. He is particularly sceptical of protestors’ refusal to outline alternatives or reforms to contemporary modes of governance and their focus on repeated public rejections of the status quo. Yet, while Krastev opens the text by suggesting that he ‘does not strive to classify the protests or to figure out how to judge their success or failure’ (p. 2), he is unwilling to take seriously the possibility that the categories of democratic institutions may not be up to the task of explaining contemporary protest movements. His own reduction of protestors to a libertarian middle class requires the rejection of other ways of imagining political dissent. Krastev’s commitment to the power of elections to ‘mesmerize’ (p. 34) and construct political alternatives deeply informs his assessment of the protests, which he reads as merely disruptive and ultimately inconsequential. Nonetheless, the text offers a compelling, if not altogether convincing, assessment of the relationship between contemporary protests and democratic institutions that will be of interest to scholars of social movements, democratic theory and liberal institutionalism.
Page 1. Page 2. Beyond the Welfare State? Page 3. For my mother Margaret and to the memory of my ... more Page 1. Page 2. Beyond the Welfare State? Page 3. For my mother Margaret and to the memory of my father John Page 4. Beyond the Welfare State? The New Political Economy of Welfare Third Edition Christopher Pierson polity Page 5. ...
Foucauldian thought, Hamilton defines freedom as the ‘combination of my ability to determine what... more Foucauldian thought, Hamilton defines freedom as the ‘combination of my ability to determine what I will do and my power to do it’ (p. 10). Freedom thus depends on power, and Hamilton argues that being free requires the power to control economic and social institutions through the political system, the freedom to choose and influence political representatives, the institutional and ideological opportunity for groups to agitate against common social obstacles, and the social space for individuals to resist social convention. Even then, for the individual, freedom may still include a further subjective meaning beyond these conditions for a free society. While clearly republican in affirming the centrality of politics to freedom, Hamilton eschews notions of ‘the people’ or the ‘common good’, following Machiavelli in characterising politics as being about conflict between social groups. He also places representation and the competition of ideas at the centre of this agonistic politics, as opposed to both the traditional republican emphasis on direct participation and more recent accounts of deliberation. Although Freedom is Power traces four domains of freedom, it is really the idea of freedom through political representation that Hamilton implies is most absent in today’s polities. Thus he proposes a range of institutional reforms to give light to this larger theoretical insight, including new representative institutions at the local level, a national legislature for non-elite representatives of the poor, and a constitutional review every 10 years. Powerfully illustrated with examples from the recent global financial crash, Freedom is Power marries a traditional problem of political thought – freedom – with realistic assumptions about power in contemporary societies. Hamilton’s conception of agonistic group politics resonates in a world increasingly heterogeneous, unequal and frequently oppressive; a world in which the scale and interdependence of social ties makes the representation of groups inevitable, and where the clash of cultures and growing post-colonial consciousness requires new political imaginaries. While some might disagree with Hamilton’s analysis of the varieties and significance of forms of contemporary power, in particular the absence of the post-national and global, by linking theoretically the problem of freedom to the question of power, Hamilton returns freedom from moral philosophy to critical social and political inquiry.
The relationship between Marxism and the welfare state is complex. Since there is not one ‘true’ ... more The relationship between Marxism and the welfare state is complex. Since there is not one ‘true’ Marxism but many and since the experience of the welfare state under advanced capitalism has proved to be quite diverse, we should hardly expect to find a single and wholly consistent Marxist explanation of welfare state development. And so it proves. Some Marxists have seen the welfare state principally as a controlling agency of the ruling capitalist class. Others have seen it as the ‘Trojan Horse’ within which socialist principles can be carried into the very heartlands of capitalism. Again some Marxists have argued that the welfare state provides the indispensable underpinning for a market-based social and economic order, whilst others have seen it as incompatible with the long-run integrity of a capitalist economy. A number of Marxist and neo-Marxist commentators have managed to affirm all of these principles more or less simultaneously! At the same time, both Marxism and the welfare state have a history. It is clear that the welfare state as an object of Marxists’ inquiry has changed through time and so (often in response to these changes) has the intellectual apparatus with which they have sought to explain it. In this chapter, we try to make sense of this diversity of Marxist explanations and consider whether Marxism can still tell us anything useful about welfare states.
As the leader of the wartime coalition, the Conservative Party entered the post-war era committed... more As the leader of the wartime coalition, the Conservative Party entered the post-war era committed to the introduction of progressive social policies to tackle poverty, healthcare, and education provision (Addison, 1994). In opposition after the shock of the 1945 election defeat, Rab Butler coordinated an even more fundamental review of party social policy, and called for ‘a total reorganisation of the social structure on which our party rested, an acceptance of redistributive taxation to reduce the extremes of poverty and wealth, and a repudiation of laissez-faire economics’ (Butler, 1971, 133). Throughout the 1950s and 1960s Conservative governments increased expenditure on health, welfare and social policy, and sought to maintain full employment. Heath experimented with neo-liberal economic policies, but pledged to improve public services, ‘abolishing poverty and squalor and raising standards of care for the old and sick’ (J. Campbell, 1993, 376). In the Cabinet, future monetarists Keith Joseph at Health and Social Security, and Margaret Thatcher at Education, presided over expanding budgets. Both were very effective at squeezing additional money out of the Treasury, with Thatcher’s White Paper, A Framework for Expansion, promising ‘an extra £1000 million per year for education by 1981’ (J. Campbell, 1993, 388).
There is a misconception under which both the architects of British social policy and many of its... more There is a misconception under which both the architects of British social policy and many of its students have frequently laboured. It is that ‘theory’ is essentially normative (at its worst, a wish-list of the way we would like things to be), whilst what is really important are ‘the facts’, which once allowed to ‘speak for themselves’, will tell us not just what is going on, but also what needs to be done. This view is misconceived. Whilst all theories have an irreducible normative content, the purpose of developing a theory of British social policy is not to speculate about what Britain would be like if only people were nicer to each other. Rather the purpose of such a theory is to explain developments in British social policy. We want our theory to be generalisable across a number of examples/areas, parsimonious (explaining as much as possible as succinctly as possible) and non-trivial (the insights that our theory delivers should be as revealing rather than as obvious as possible). At the same time the twin belief that facts might ‘speak for themselves’ and, in the process, ‘tell us what to do’ is unsustainable. The facts always have to be divined and explained within a particular theoretical framework (however implicit and inarticulate this may be) and the view that we only have to know particular facts (about the incidence of poverty, for example) in order to be able to say what we should do about them is hopelessly naive.
The (partial) implementation of William Beveridge’s wartime report on Social Insurance and Allied... more The (partial) implementation of William Beveridge’s wartime report on Social Insurance and Allied Services was for long seen as one of the main pillars upon which the postwar order in Britain had been built. Almost as frequently, this postwar regime has been described as social democratic, in intention and consequence, if not always in name Fifty years on, the confidence that surrounded both the formation of the postwar welfare state and the more general political ambitions of social democrats has largely evaporated. Since the mid-1970s, and more particularly since the arrival of Mrs Thatcher’s first administration in 1979, opinion has seemingly moved decisively against the welfare state or at least against that form of it which social democrats had traditionally recommended. In this chapter, I consider whether the social democratic political agenda is truly exhausted or whether, under the radically changed social and economic circumstances of the 1990s, it is still possible to generate a social policy programme consonant with the ambitions of social democrats. I do so in the context of a detailed assessment of the main principles underlying the Borrie Commissions’s Report on Social Justice.1
<p>This chapter argues that the starkest of the institutional problems facing social democr... more <p>This chapter argues that the starkest of the institutional problems facing social democracy now is a growing inability to win elections. Added to this was the challenge of a long-term decline in the industrial wing of social democracy. Historically, social democracy has been the politics of the labour movement, and a key component of this movement has always been trade unions and their members. While that relationship was not always as close as it was in the British or Swedish cases, trade unionism was almost always the 'other half' of social democracy. However, the 1980s were a time of loss for this 'other side' of social democracy. Trade unions were becoming increasingly feminised, more focused in the public sector and drawing in increasing numbers of middle-class public service members.</p>
amounts to an antipolitics. He is particularly sceptical of protestors’ refusal to outline altern... more amounts to an antipolitics. He is particularly sceptical of protestors’ refusal to outline alternatives or reforms to contemporary modes of governance and their focus on repeated public rejections of the status quo. Yet, while Krastev opens the text by suggesting that he ‘does not strive to classify the protests or to figure out how to judge their success or failure’ (p. 2), he is unwilling to take seriously the possibility that the categories of democratic institutions may not be up to the task of explaining contemporary protest movements. His own reduction of protestors to a libertarian middle class requires the rejection of other ways of imagining political dissent. Krastev’s commitment to the power of elections to ‘mesmerize’ (p. 34) and construct political alternatives deeply informs his assessment of the protests, which he reads as merely disruptive and ultimately inconsequential. Nonetheless, the text offers a compelling, if not altogether convincing, assessment of the relationship between contemporary protests and democratic institutions that will be of interest to scholars of social movements, democratic theory and liberal institutionalism.
Page 1. Page 2. Beyond the Welfare State? Page 3. For my mother Margaret and to the memory of my ... more Page 1. Page 2. Beyond the Welfare State? Page 3. For my mother Margaret and to the memory of my father John Page 4. Beyond the Welfare State? The New Political Economy of Welfare Third Edition Christopher Pierson polity Page 5. ...
Foucauldian thought, Hamilton defines freedom as the ‘combination of my ability to determine what... more Foucauldian thought, Hamilton defines freedom as the ‘combination of my ability to determine what I will do and my power to do it’ (p. 10). Freedom thus depends on power, and Hamilton argues that being free requires the power to control economic and social institutions through the political system, the freedom to choose and influence political representatives, the institutional and ideological opportunity for groups to agitate against common social obstacles, and the social space for individuals to resist social convention. Even then, for the individual, freedom may still include a further subjective meaning beyond these conditions for a free society. While clearly republican in affirming the centrality of politics to freedom, Hamilton eschews notions of ‘the people’ or the ‘common good’, following Machiavelli in characterising politics as being about conflict between social groups. He also places representation and the competition of ideas at the centre of this agonistic politics, as opposed to both the traditional republican emphasis on direct participation and more recent accounts of deliberation. Although Freedom is Power traces four domains of freedom, it is really the idea of freedom through political representation that Hamilton implies is most absent in today’s polities. Thus he proposes a range of institutional reforms to give light to this larger theoretical insight, including new representative institutions at the local level, a national legislature for non-elite representatives of the poor, and a constitutional review every 10 years. Powerfully illustrated with examples from the recent global financial crash, Freedom is Power marries a traditional problem of political thought – freedom – with realistic assumptions about power in contemporary societies. Hamilton’s conception of agonistic group politics resonates in a world increasingly heterogeneous, unequal and frequently oppressive; a world in which the scale and interdependence of social ties makes the representation of groups inevitable, and where the clash of cultures and growing post-colonial consciousness requires new political imaginaries. While some might disagree with Hamilton’s analysis of the varieties and significance of forms of contemporary power, in particular the absence of the post-national and global, by linking theoretically the problem of freedom to the question of power, Hamilton returns freedom from moral philosophy to critical social and political inquiry.
The relationship between Marxism and the welfare state is complex. Since there is not one ‘true’ ... more The relationship between Marxism and the welfare state is complex. Since there is not one ‘true’ Marxism but many and since the experience of the welfare state under advanced capitalism has proved to be quite diverse, we should hardly expect to find a single and wholly consistent Marxist explanation of welfare state development. And so it proves. Some Marxists have seen the welfare state principally as a controlling agency of the ruling capitalist class. Others have seen it as the ‘Trojan Horse’ within which socialist principles can be carried into the very heartlands of capitalism. Again some Marxists have argued that the welfare state provides the indispensable underpinning for a market-based social and economic order, whilst others have seen it as incompatible with the long-run integrity of a capitalist economy. A number of Marxist and neo-Marxist commentators have managed to affirm all of these principles more or less simultaneously! At the same time, both Marxism and the welfare state have a history. It is clear that the welfare state as an object of Marxists’ inquiry has changed through time and so (often in response to these changes) has the intellectual apparatus with which they have sought to explain it. In this chapter, we try to make sense of this diversity of Marxist explanations and consider whether Marxism can still tell us anything useful about welfare states.
As the leader of the wartime coalition, the Conservative Party entered the post-war era committed... more As the leader of the wartime coalition, the Conservative Party entered the post-war era committed to the introduction of progressive social policies to tackle poverty, healthcare, and education provision (Addison, 1994). In opposition after the shock of the 1945 election defeat, Rab Butler coordinated an even more fundamental review of party social policy, and called for ‘a total reorganisation of the social structure on which our party rested, an acceptance of redistributive taxation to reduce the extremes of poverty and wealth, and a repudiation of laissez-faire economics’ (Butler, 1971, 133). Throughout the 1950s and 1960s Conservative governments increased expenditure on health, welfare and social policy, and sought to maintain full employment. Heath experimented with neo-liberal economic policies, but pledged to improve public services, ‘abolishing poverty and squalor and raising standards of care for the old and sick’ (J. Campbell, 1993, 376). In the Cabinet, future monetarists Keith Joseph at Health and Social Security, and Margaret Thatcher at Education, presided over expanding budgets. Both were very effective at squeezing additional money out of the Treasury, with Thatcher’s White Paper, A Framework for Expansion, promising ‘an extra £1000 million per year for education by 1981’ (J. Campbell, 1993, 388).
There is a misconception under which both the architects of British social policy and many of its... more There is a misconception under which both the architects of British social policy and many of its students have frequently laboured. It is that ‘theory’ is essentially normative (at its worst, a wish-list of the way we would like things to be), whilst what is really important are ‘the facts’, which once allowed to ‘speak for themselves’, will tell us not just what is going on, but also what needs to be done. This view is misconceived. Whilst all theories have an irreducible normative content, the purpose of developing a theory of British social policy is not to speculate about what Britain would be like if only people were nicer to each other. Rather the purpose of such a theory is to explain developments in British social policy. We want our theory to be generalisable across a number of examples/areas, parsimonious (explaining as much as possible as succinctly as possible) and non-trivial (the insights that our theory delivers should be as revealing rather than as obvious as possible). At the same time the twin belief that facts might ‘speak for themselves’ and, in the process, ‘tell us what to do’ is unsustainable. The facts always have to be divined and explained within a particular theoretical framework (however implicit and inarticulate this may be) and the view that we only have to know particular facts (about the incidence of poverty, for example) in order to be able to say what we should do about them is hopelessly naive.
The (partial) implementation of William Beveridge’s wartime report on Social Insurance and Allied... more The (partial) implementation of William Beveridge’s wartime report on Social Insurance and Allied Services was for long seen as one of the main pillars upon which the postwar order in Britain had been built. Almost as frequently, this postwar regime has been described as social democratic, in intention and consequence, if not always in name Fifty years on, the confidence that surrounded both the formation of the postwar welfare state and the more general political ambitions of social democrats has largely evaporated. Since the mid-1970s, and more particularly since the arrival of Mrs Thatcher’s first administration in 1979, opinion has seemingly moved decisively against the welfare state or at least against that form of it which social democrats had traditionally recommended. In this chapter, I consider whether the social democratic political agenda is truly exhausted or whether, under the radically changed social and economic circumstances of the 1990s, it is still possible to generate a social policy programme consonant with the ambitions of social democrats. I do so in the context of a detailed assessment of the main principles underlying the Borrie Commissions’s Report on Social Justice.1
We live in a world which is characterised by both a radical inequality in wealth and incomes and ... more We live in a world which is characterised by both a radical inequality in wealth and incomes and the accelerating depletion of scarce natural resources. One of the things that prevents us from addressing these problems, perhaps even prevents us from seeing them as problems, is our belief that individuals and corporations have claims to certain resources and income streams that are non-negotiable, even when these claims seem manifestly hostile to our collective long-term well-being. This book is an attempt to understand how, why and when we came to believe these things. This first volume traces ideas about private property and its justification in the Latin West, starting with the ancient Greeks. It follows several lines of thinking which run through the Roman and medieval worlds. It traces the profound impact of the rise of Christianity and the instantiation of both natural and Roman Law. It considers the complex interplay of religious and legal ideas as these developed through the Renaissance, the Reformation and the counter-Reformation leading on to the ideas associated with modern natural law. The first volume concludes with a close re-reading of Locke. We can find well-made arguments for private property throughout this history but these were not always the arguments which we now assume them to have been and they were almost always radically conditional, qualified by other considerations, above all, a sense of what the securing of the common good required. These arguments included an appeal to the natural law, to the dispensations of a just God, to utility, to securing economic growth and to maintaining the peace. They almost never included the claim that individuals have naturally- or God-given rights that trump the well-being, especially the basic well-being, of other individuals. In late modernity, we have lost sight of many of these arguments - to our collective loss.
Edited with Francis Castles, Stephan Leibfried, Jane Lewis and Herbert Obinger, The Oxford Handbo... more Edited with Francis Castles, Stephan Leibfried, Jane Lewis and Herbert Obinger, The Oxford Handbook of the Welfare State is the authoritative and definitive guide to the contemporary welfare state. In a volume consisting of nearly fifty newly-written chapters, a broad range of the world's leading scholars offer a comprehensive account of everything one needs to know about the modern welfare state. The book is divided into eight sections. It opens with three chapters that evaluate the philosophical case for (and against) the welfare state. Surveys of the welfare state’s history and of the approaches taken to its study are followed by four extended sections, running to some thirty-five chapters in all, which offer a comprehensive and in-depth survey of our current state of knowledge across the whole range of issues that the welfare state embraces. The first of these sections looks at inputs and actors (including the roles of parties, unions, and employers), the impact of gender and religion, patterns of migration and a changing public opinion, the role of international organisations and the impact of globalisation. The next two sections cover policy inputs (in areas such as pensions, health care, disability, care of the elderly, unemployment, and labour market activation) and their outcomes (in terms of inequality and poverty, macroeconomic performance, and retrenchment). The seventh section consists of seven chapters which survey welfare state experience around the globe (and not just within the OECD). Two final chapters consider questions about the global future of the welfare state.
As the twenty-first century dawned, social democratic parties across Europe and beyond found them... more As the twenty-first century dawned, social democratic parties across Europe and beyond found themselves newly, and rather surprisingly, in the ascendant. Britain's New Labour was only the most spectacular in a whole series of political restorations. For many, this renewal only became possible when 'modernizing' social democratic parties jettisoned their old ideological and institutional baggage, setting off down a 'third way' that rejected the outmoded ideas of both left and right. The argument of Hard Choices is that this view is doubly misleading: it misrepresents the past and misunderstands the present.
The first half of the book restores some of the complexity to social democracy's past and shows that it was much more subtle, varied and intelligent than its latter-day critics suppose. Turning to the present, the second half of the book shows how a few contemporary half-truths - relating to globalization and demographic change - have been used to justify the abandonment of the defining core of a social democratic politics. The book does not argue that 'nothing has really changed'. In fact, a great deal has changed and policy-makers have to adjust to a range of new circumstances, constraints (and opportunities). But those who exhort us simply to abandon the 'traditional' terrain of the centre-left are wrong. Social democracy remains just what it always was - a politics of messy compromises and hard choices.
Over the past decade, Beyond the Welfare State? has become established as the key text on the eme... more Over the past decade, Beyond the Welfare State? has become established as the key text on the emergence and development of welfare states. It offers a comprehensive and remarkably well-informed introduction to the ever more intense debates that surround the history and, still more importantly, the future of welfare in advanced industrialised states.
Comprehensively revised and re-written, this third edition of the book embraces all of the most important theoretical and empirical developments in welfare state studies of recent years. Working within an explicitly comparative framework, the book draws on a wealth of international evidence to survey what are now the most pressing issues surrounding the future of welfare: among them, globalisation, demographic change, declining fertility, postindustrialism and immigration. It draws extensively on the explosion of work on welfare states that has emerged within the North American political science community over the past ten years as well as giving detailed attention to developments with the UK, continental and northern Europe and beyond.
Beyond the Welfare State? remains the most comprehensive and up-to-date guide to the complex of issues that surround welfare reform. It is required reading for anyone who wants to come to terms with what is really at stake in arguments about the future of welfare.
The new edition of this well-established and highly regarded book continues to provide the cleare... more The new edition of this well-established and highly regarded book continues to provide the clearest and most comprehensive introduction to the modern state. It examines the state from its historical origins at the birth of modernity to its current jeopardized position in the globalized politics of the 21st Century. The book has been entirely revised and updated throughout, including substantial new material on the financial crisis and the environment.
In this book the author examines the concept of "the end of socialism" assessing the evidence tha... more In this book the author examines the concept of "the end of socialism" assessing the evidence that underpins this position, analysing market socialism and confronting the question of whether any form of socialism can any longer be thought to be "feasible".
The Welfare State Reader has established itself as a vital source of outstanding original researc... more The Welfare State Reader has established itself as a vital source of outstanding original research since its original appearance in 2000. In the third edition, Pierson, Castles and Naumann have comprehensively overhauled the content, bringing it wholly up to date with contemporary discussions about this most crucial area of social and political life. The book includes seventeen new selections, all reflecting the latest thinking and research in welfare state studies. These readings are organized around contemporary debates, such as the current trajectories of, constraints on and challenges to contemporary welfare regimes, as well as evolving ideas and emergent forms that constitute the future of welfare. In particular, new readings focus on issues such as ageing populations and low fertility, climate change and global financial uncertainty, and nascent ′politics of happiness′. As in previous editions, the volume begins with a collection of readings that provide a grounding in core approaches to welfare, and each section is set in context by a new editorial introduction. As well as bringing together classic debates, The Welfare State Reader represents an invaluable guide to what is happening at the cutting edge of welfare research, giving the reader an unrivalled overview of debates surrounding the welfare state.
The first major collection of Karl Marx's writings since the fall of Communism in eastern Europe ... more The first major collection of Karl Marx's writings since the fall of Communism in eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. That event notwithstanding, Marx remains one of the towering figures of modern intellectual culture. His work is still the most systematic, comprehensive and sustained assault upon the central tenets of capitalism. Many ideas in political life at the end of the twentieth century, heard often enough from the mouths of the most trenchantly anti-Marxist politicians, can be straightforwardly traced to the writings in this volume.
The extensive readings collected here cover all the main areas of Marx's work, stretching from the early 1840s to the early 1880s. Longer selections from the major texts, such as Capital, The Communist Manifesto and The German Ideology, are complemented with shorter but crucial passages from his less familiar works.
Pierson's extensive introduction guides the novice reader through the most important and exciting elements in Marx's work. He offers not just a concise and lucid guide to Marx's thought but also shows us why we still need to read Marx after the collapse of Communism. Whatever has been the fate of Marxism, Marx remains, as this book shows, a key figure for our own times.
This new edition offers both a critical commentary on the core areas of social policy in Britain... more This new edition offers both a critical commentary on the core areas of social policy in Britain - particularly as they have developed under the auspices of the New Labour government - and an appraisal of the key ideas currently informing British welfare policy. It thus combines discussion of staple topics with original arguments about the new shape of social policy at the start of the twenty-first century. All the chapters are freshly commissioned by the highly regarded editors.
Uploads
Papers by chris pierson
The first half of the book restores some of the complexity to social democracy's past and shows that it was much more subtle, varied and intelligent than its latter-day critics suppose. Turning to the present, the second half of the book shows how a few contemporary half-truths - relating to globalization and demographic change - have been used to justify the abandonment of the defining core of a social democratic politics. The book does not argue that 'nothing has really changed'. In fact, a great deal has changed and policy-makers have to adjust to a range of new circumstances, constraints (and opportunities). But those who exhort us simply to abandon the 'traditional' terrain of the centre-left are wrong. Social democracy remains just what it always was - a politics of messy compromises and hard choices.
Comprehensively revised and re-written, this third edition of the book embraces all of the most important theoretical and empirical developments in welfare state studies of recent years. Working within an explicitly comparative framework, the book draws on a wealth of international evidence to survey what are now the most pressing issues surrounding the future of welfare: among them, globalisation, demographic change, declining fertility, postindustrialism and immigration. It draws extensively on the explosion of work on welfare states that has emerged within the North American political science community over the past ten years as well as giving detailed attention to developments with the UK, continental and northern Europe and beyond.
Beyond the Welfare State? remains the most comprehensive and up-to-date guide to the complex of issues that surround welfare reform. It is required reading for anyone who wants to come to terms with what is really at stake in arguments about the future of welfare.
The extensive readings collected here cover all the main areas of Marx's work, stretching from the early 1840s to the early 1880s. Longer selections from the major texts, such as Capital, The Communist Manifesto and The German Ideology, are complemented with shorter but crucial passages from his less familiar works.
Pierson's extensive introduction guides the novice reader through the most important and exciting elements in Marx's work. He offers not just a concise and lucid guide to Marx's thought but also shows us why we still need to read Marx after the collapse of Communism. Whatever has been the fate of Marxism, Marx remains, as this book shows, a key figure for our own times.