On May 17, 2008, at 11:33 AM, Eric wrote:
> Yes. The provision of food, housing, and education always also
> commands, to be responsible, be normal, parent and behave in
> acceptable ways. And paternalistic is the right word, as Harvey is
> most nostalgic for the welfare state (positive liberty) without
> seeming to be aware of its normalizing regulations (paternalism) --
> <http://www.metamute.org/en/The-Battle-of-all-Mothers>, for example
> -- that is, when, as in the passage I quote, he's not endorsing them..
>
> There's also a sense in which food, housing, and education are also
> negative: *from* hunger, want, and ignorance. But they aren't freedom
> *to* anything. Except work.
So what would you do? Let people fend for themselves? What's wrong with a non-intrusive, decommodifying welfare state?
Doug