Suchergebnisse

AbstractThis article discusses the debate on gendering welfare states. It criticizes typologies based on the differentiation between degrees of familialization and defamilialization and proposes a new typology based on the notion of genderization and degenderization. It also argues against the notion of regime types, which includes outputs in their classification systems. Instead it argues that typologies should concentrate on policies to make it possible for researchers and policymakers to analyze the influence of different types of policies on different societies. It is important to know whether similar policies would lead to different outcomes under different socio‐economic or cultural conditions. The article goes on to show how one could analyze family policies based on a typology based on genderization and degenderization.

With the electoral losses of left-leaning parties in the past year in Germany, the UK and even in the model social democratic country, Sweden, recent events do not seem encouraging for those engaged in progressive politics. Given the meltdown of the financial markets and the rising consensus against free-market policies, even within the business community and business magazines, such as the Economist, one might have expected the Left to do much better and even see some kind of renaissance. However, if one puts it in perspective, the situation in my opinion is not as gloomy as it seems. Adapted from the source document.

AbstractThis article argues that policies that promote gender equality actually also increase freedom of choice. Thus, despite the neo‐liberal criticism that welfare policies limit choices and privatization and market solutions increase freedom of choice, this article concludes that market‐liberal welfare regimes offer less choice than the Nordic type of social‐democratic welfare regimes, which have openly striven to promote gender equality. They do so by making it easier for mothers to choose to work (by making day care available and making it easier for fathers to stay at home with children) and by giving fathers the ability to choose to spend more time with children. However, within the realm of such policies, it is still possible to offer more or less freedom of choice, for example, by making parental leaves either extremely flexible or rigid in how they are utilized. Interestingly, it turns out that, in the real world, policies that promote gender equality even offer greater freedom of choice for the group of women considered to be 'family oriented' as well as for lesbian and homosexual couples.

This article shows that by using more sophisticated statistical methods, we can achieve better results in our understanding of welfare attitudes. By using the same data as a previous study, this article shows that welfare attitudes actually have two dimensions: support for big government & support for equality. When this second dimension is added, the common conclusion no longer holds up that Swedes are not more positive toward welfare policies than other European countries. Instead, it turns out that Swedes are much more positive toward equality than in European countries with more liberal & conservative welfare regimes. This indicates that political culture matters more than previously thought. Swedes are not more likely than other Europeans to desire welfare benefits, but they are more likely to support an egalitarian tax system that can finance these benefits. They are also more likely to see welfare benefits as a means to achieving equality, rather than simply a means for fulfilling needs. This article also contradicts the common claim that social democratic welfare regimes create gender divisions, in which women become more supportive than men of welfare policies. Finally, this article also supports the social citizenship hypothesis, by showing those who support generous welfare policies & income equality are more likely to vote for leftist parties. That is, social democratic parties have a political incentive to introduce universialist policies that create support for welfare programs, since this increases their chances of winning elections. 4 Tables, 5 Diagrams, 1 Appendix, 62 References. Adapted from the source document.

The Polish Right became weak & fragmented after the fall of Communism, while paradoxically the Right in the Czech Republic, a country with strong social-democratic traditions, grew stronger & more unified. These different trajectories are partially explained by the differences in their electoral systems. Poland has a semi-presidential system with direct elections while the Czech Republic president is elected by parliament & real power resides with the Prime Minister. In contrast to prevailing theory, in postcommunist Poland, direct elections encouraged party fragmentations by discouraging presidential candidates from building strong parties. In the Czech Republic, the anticommunist Right was able to maintain strength & stability by facing the dominant liberal party; a change to direct elections there is discussed. 2 Tables, 2 Photographs. M. Pflum