Thursday, February 5, 2009
Welfare and Solidarity
Durkheim discusses the relations in society for those who are a part of division of labor. My essay focuses on how Durkheim doesn't mention what life is like for those who are excluded from the division of labor. People on welfare are unemployed, so are they treated differently for not contributing to society?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Mechanical solidarity occurs in smaller societies where there is little division of labor. People are very different compared to organic solidarity because they are based on likeness where everyone looks alike and acts the same (34). Mechanical solidarity has repressive laws where people are punished for their crime, which is defined as anything that violates the common consciousness (39). Repressive law is embodied by the state and defends the collective consciousness (42, 43). If the collective consciousness is attacked, it is seen by society as a personal attack because everyone shares the same ideas. In order to keep the peace in society, they punish the ones who rebel by public humiliation, passion, and organization (55-59). Therefore, society will learn to conform because they know there will be consequences.
When division of labor is well developed more people are specialized in different jobs creating more relations among people in the society. The collective consciousness declines because there is more individuality creating organic solidarity (84). It is based on interdependence because people rely on each other’s goods and services to survive. Organic solidarity contains restitutive laws that restore relationships to their previous state as society becomes more complex (68). People enter into more relations as division of labor increases, so they need new laws to compensate for the change. Organic solidarity focuses more on contracts like marriages and property because people are entering into more relations and if it is not regulated by the state, it will not produce solidarity (173).
In organic solidarity people are more focused on being individuals and do not share the same beliefs. Everyone has their own interests and specialties, which is why they depends on each other. They are more focused on the relations with one another, but in mechanical solidarity the society’s main goal is to share the same beliefs and interests (34).
I think welfare could use mechanical solidarity because it is necessary for our society to have repressive laws that maintain the system of welfare. Our society is well developed so we need laws that punish people. If there aren't consequences for people's actions, there would be crime everywhere and the society would become chaotic. There are tons of people who fraud the welfare system and use it for other purposes. We don't want to just get rid of welfare because there are people who abuse the system. We want to maintain it and find other solutions to heighten security and make harsher laws so people won't try to scam welfare. Mechanical solidarity is only useful because it provides punishment, but Durkheim uses it in a different sense. Durkheim only thinks people should be punished for being different, which is not the case in society today. Our society is very specialized and we thrive from individuality, so mechanical solidarity is useless. People are on welfare because they cannot find work in their specialty, so if our society was based on mechanical solidarity where people all do the same thing, we would not exist anymore.
Organic solidarity focuses on restitutive laws that may not be useful for welfare. Durkheim focuses on division of labor and solidarity, but he does not discuss the issue of unemployed workers. The purpose of welfare is to provide assistance to people who are struggling financially, but he does not see this idea. He does not mention if there is solidarity between those who are excluded from the division of labor and how they might be treated for being unemployed. Durkheim talks a lot about how people interact with one another through their specialized work, but disregards the idea that society may not have a job for everyone. He says in mechanical solidarity that everyone is the same, but that cannot be true if every single person in society is not working. The interdependence in organic solidarity could exclude people because they are not contributing in society like the rest of them. Durkheim makes it clear that people depend on one another for their specialty, but if they do not have one to offer, should the person be considered worthless and excluded from social solidarity? Organic and mechanical solidarity would not fit in my institution because Durkheim does not discuss unemployment.
Post a Comment