Geoffrey Finlayson
- Published in print:
- 1994
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780198227601
- eISBN:
- 9780191678752
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198227601.001.0001
- Subject:
- History, British and Irish Modern History
This book presents an analysis of social welfare in Britain from 1830 until the present day. The book explores the changing relationship between voluntarism and the state throughout this period, ...
More
This book presents an analysis of social welfare in Britain from 1830 until the present day. The book explores the changing relationship between voluntarism and the state throughout this period, unravelling the complex interactions of government, commerce, and individuals. It examines the provision of welfare and the attitudes and beliefs surrounding it, in all its many guises, from Victorian private philanthropy and informal social networks to the collectivist ideals of the Welfare State and the convictions of Thatcherite individualism. This book is, in addition, an intellectual study of the concept of citizenship over the last two centuries, tracing developing notions of the duties and obligations implicit in the idea of the citizen, as well as the rights and entitlements.Less
This book presents an analysis of social welfare in Britain from 1830 until the present day. The book explores the changing relationship between voluntarism and the state throughout this period, unravelling the complex interactions of government, commerce, and individuals. It examines the provision of welfare and the attitudes and beliefs surrounding it, in all its many guises, from Victorian private philanthropy and informal social networks to the collectivist ideals of the Welfare State and the convictions of Thatcherite individualism. This book is, in addition, an intellectual study of the concept of citizenship over the last two centuries, tracing developing notions of the duties and obligations implicit in the idea of the citizen, as well as the rights and entitlements.
Robert R. Korstad and James L. Leloudis
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- July 2014
- ISBN:
- 9780807833797
- eISBN:
- 9781469603674
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- University of North Carolina Press
- DOI:
- 10.5149/9780807895740_korstad
- Subject:
- Political Science, American Politics
When Governor Terry Sanford established the North Carolina Fund in 1963, he saw it as a way to provide a better life for the “tens of thousands whose family income is so low that daily subsistence is ...
More
When Governor Terry Sanford established the North Carolina Fund in 1963, he saw it as a way to provide a better life for the “tens of thousands whose family income is so low that daily subsistence is always in doubt.” This book offers a lively account of this pioneering effort in America's War on Poverty. The book describes how the Fund's initial successes grew out of its reliance on private philanthropy and federal dollars and its commitment to the democratic mobilization of the poor. Both were calculated tactics designed to outflank conservative state lawmakers and entrenched local interests that nourished Jim Crow, perpetuated one-party politics, and protected an economy built on cheap labor. By late 1968, when the Fund closed its doors, a resurgent politics of race had gained the advantage, led by a Republican Party that had reorganized itself around opposition to civil rights and aid to the poor. The North Carolina Fund came up short in its battle against poverty, but its story continues to be a source of inspiration and instruction for new generations of Americans.Less
When Governor Terry Sanford established the North Carolina Fund in 1963, he saw it as a way to provide a better life for the “tens of thousands whose family income is so low that daily subsistence is always in doubt.” This book offers a lively account of this pioneering effort in America's War on Poverty. The book describes how the Fund's initial successes grew out of its reliance on private philanthropy and federal dollars and its commitment to the democratic mobilization of the poor. Both were calculated tactics designed to outflank conservative state lawmakers and entrenched local interests that nourished Jim Crow, perpetuated one-party politics, and protected an economy built on cheap labor. By late 1968, when the Fund closed its doors, a resurgent politics of race had gained the advantage, led by a Republican Party that had reorganized itself around opposition to civil rights and aid to the poor. The North Carolina Fund came up short in its battle against poverty, but its story continues to be a source of inspiration and instruction for new generations of Americans.
Ronald Labonté and Arne Ruckert
- Published in print:
- 2019
- Published Online:
- May 2019
- ISBN:
- 9780198835356
- eISBN:
- 9780191872952
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780198835356.003.0014
- Subject:
- Public Health and Epidemiology, Public Health, Epidemiology
There is no global government, but a growing myriad of global governance platforms. Some are intergovernmental (United Nations and affiliated agencies, differing ‘clubs’ of nations such as the G-7 or ...
More
There is no global government, but a growing myriad of global governance platforms. Some are intergovernmental (United Nations and affiliated agencies, differing ‘clubs’ of nations such as the G-7 or G-20); others are multi-stakeholder, drawing together governments, private sector interests, civil society organizations, philanthropists, and academics or other prominent individuals. The plurality and questionable democratic legitimacy of many of these governance platforms is problematic in terms of who has authority or influence over global norms and rules affecting the social determinants of health. Four intergovernmental organizations are profiled for the distinct roles they play in global health governance: the World Health Organization (WHO) (nominally the lead global health governance body), the World Bank (whose financial resources eclipse those of the WHO), United Nations Children’s Fund (with a particular remit to improve children’s health), and the International Labour Organization (a unique tripartite body advocating for global social protection floors).Less
There is no global government, but a growing myriad of global governance platforms. Some are intergovernmental (United Nations and affiliated agencies, differing ‘clubs’ of nations such as the G-7 or G-20); others are multi-stakeholder, drawing together governments, private sector interests, civil society organizations, philanthropists, and academics or other prominent individuals. The plurality and questionable democratic legitimacy of many of these governance platforms is problematic in terms of who has authority or influence over global norms and rules affecting the social determinants of health. Four intergovernmental organizations are profiled for the distinct roles they play in global health governance: the World Health Organization (WHO) (nominally the lead global health governance body), the World Bank (whose financial resources eclipse those of the WHO), United Nations Children’s Fund (with a particular remit to improve children’s health), and the International Labour Organization (a unique tripartite body advocating for global social protection floors).
