Sevelsted Anders
Department of Management, Politics, and Philosophy, Copenhagen Business School, Porcelænshaven 18, 4.132, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark.
School of Social Work, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Voluntas. 2022 Aug 10:1-11. doi: 10.1007/s11266-022-00509-z.
The article argues that in Denmark during the past 150 years, moral elites have been central in settling paradoxes within social policy by developing 'classifications' of citizens and sectors: who are deserving of help and what sector (public or third) should provide care. Contrary to widely held beliefs, historically, there is no logical or practical connection between 'more deserving' and 'state support'. Theoretically, the article integrates elite scholarship and cultural sociology in developing a concept of moral elites' -their sources of moral authority-and , the way that they have used their power to classify citizens and sectors. Empirically, the Danish moral elite and its involvement in social policy are analyzed based on secondary as well as primary historical sources. Findings: The development of the Danish moral elite has roots in the administrators of the nineteenth-century absolutist state: the clergy, medical doctors, and lawyers. Educational resources and state affiliation continue to be central to moral elite status. Economists have ascended to the top of the moral elite, while clergymen have dropped out. Three major classifications were developed during the period. 'Help to self-help' (late nineteenth century): deserving poor should receive help from private charity, while the public system should deter and discipline. 'Rights' (mid-twentieth century): the state should care for all, philanthropy mostly considered stigmatizing. 'Workfare' (late twentieth century to present): citizens are considered deserving as long as they are 'active', and sectors are considered equal in providing for citizens as long as they reach the economistic goal of activation.
文章认为,在过去150年的丹麦,道德精英在通过对公民和部门进行“分类”来解决社会政策中的矛盾方面发挥了核心作用:谁值得帮助,以及哪个部门(公共部门或第三部门)应该提供照料。与广泛持有的观点相反,从历史上看,“更值得帮助”与“国家支持”之间没有逻辑或实际联系。从理论上讲,本文将精英学术研究与文化社会学结合起来,以发展出一个关于道德精英的概念——他们的道德权威来源——以及他们利用权力对公民和部门进行分类的方式。从实证角度看,基于二手和一手历史资料对丹麦道德精英及其对社会政策的参与进行了分析。研究结果:丹麦道德精英的发展根源在于19世纪专制国家的行政人员:神职人员、医生和律师。教育资源和国家归属仍然是道德精英地位的核心要素。经济学家已升至道德精英的顶端,而神职人员则不再属于其中。在此期间形成了三大分类。“自助援助”(19世纪后期):应得救济的穷人应从私人慈善机构获得帮助,而公共系统应起到威慑和惩戒作用。“权利”(20世纪中叶):国家应照顾所有人,慈善行为大多被视为有辱人格。“工作福利”(20世纪后期至今):只要公民“积极主动”,就被认为应得帮助,只要各部门实现了激活的经济目标,就被视为在为公民提供帮助方面是平等的。