Milton Friedman – Emergence of the modern welfare state

Milton Friedman - Emergence of the modern welfare state



the emergence of the modern welfare state the first modern state to introduce on a fairly large scale the kind of welfare measures that have become popular in most societies today was the newly created German Empire under the leadership of the iron Chancellor Otto von Bismarck in the early 1880s he introduced a comprehensive scheme of social security offering the worker insurance against accident sickness and old-age his motives were a complex mixture of paternalistic concern for the lower classes and shrewd politics his measures served to undermine the political appeal of the newly emerging Social Democrats it may seem paradoxical that an essentially autocratic an aristocratic state such as pre-world War one Germany in today's jargon a right-wing dictatorship should have led the way in introducing measures that are generally linked to socialism and the left but there is no paradox even putting to one side Bismarck's political motives believers in aristocracy and socialism share a faith in centralized rule in rule by command rather than by voluntary cooperation they differ in who should rule whether an elite determined by birth or experts supposedly chosen on merit both proclaim no doubt sincerely that they wish to promote the well-being of the general public that they know what is in the public interest on how to attain it better than the ordinary person both therefore profess a paternalistic philosophy and both end up if they attain power promoting the interests of their own class in the name of the general welfare

Related Posts

42 thoughts on “Milton Friedman – Emergence of the modern welfare state

  1. This personality cult for MF has got to stop! He was generally right about very little! His disciples can't find anything useful he ever wrote except for criticisms of other ideas. Very sad!
    This is a particularly misleading video, a real pile of garbage: grouping together social security with Hitler and Stalin and other totalitarian regime.

  2. Why were we shown a swatz stika ..Bismarck also had a marriage age as we have tody giving germanys prostitution rate an unhealthy result. Its giving us broken homes and breeding pedophiles….Hitlers black cross wasnt around in Bismarcks germany, why are you labeling germany a nazi state in the pre WW1 era ? Dumb ass.

  3. Milton Friedman is all for a communist socialist welfare state as long as it only benefits the rich. Right, Milton?

  4. Nazi gurmany tried to create a no class society through purification of inferior or useless people, Communism tried to make a no class society by destroying the middle , upperclass and get rid of anyone useless. Both systems had the same principles in them and both had the ultimate aim of a class less tyrannical society but the methods to achieve this goal were different.

  5. Extremely left= Tyranny 100% government control
    Extremely right= Anarchy 0% government control
    Based of the above was Nazi Gurmany right wing or left wing?
    Based of the above was USSR right wing or left wing?
    Based of the above is the USA heading right wing or left wing?
    Carl marx- Create anarchy then Order( Tyranny) can follow without opposition from the people.
    The USA as a nation was the only one to successfully balance government control and freedom but sadly it is heading Left because Tyranny is made for a godless unmoral society which the USA is becoming. Freedom can only be trusted in the hands of a godly, uncorrupted, moraly correct nation and if this is not the case then the government must fill the void.

  6.  Classical Liberalism, neo conservative ideology, always appears to be advocated by people who don't envisage themselves working for somebody else. Discuss.

  7. except the communists killed approx 100-200million  people in china and russia at least

    where as the national socialists transformed germany from the poorest european country in 1933 to the wealthiest in 1937 through peaceful means.

  8. Can you read? I wrote that the PROOFIT is distributed under the control of the people. This distribution is not at the whim of the Big Jewish Brother, but by the will of the people.

  9. Thats funny , in your socialist example do people have the freedom to not have their money "distributed" ? Or are they forced by the threat of violence by a powerful gun weilding state to pay up or else ?

  10. The term right and far right is very ambiguous… if you defend big government and you're not racist you're left, where as if you're some crazy racist and defend big government all of a sudden you're right… its a bit of a dodgy scale.

  11. Mr. Friedman is the ignorant.
    The basic idea of german nazism – the priority of the master's race. Communist ideology based on the internationalism and the exclusion of exploitation of employees.

  12. nonsense.Socialism is the system (by definition) where the profit is distributed under the control of the people. In other words, it is a democracy. America – a totalitarian system. That is the difference.

  13. Con't:- Sending their children of to fight and die in wars that only the rich benefitted from who forced the masses to slave in stinking slums, working in toxic sweatshops for peanuts while their "betters" lorded it over them. Only with the growth of Liberal Democracy and universal suffrage did the lot of the working poor start to improve. Indeed it is only since the end of wwii that most if not all nations workers started to get a measure of reward for the labour they supplied.

  14. Liberal Democracies do not elect dictators but for the people to choose their own leaders in regular free and open elections I don't quite see the connection between say an Obama and the leaders of North Korea? The emergence of the modern welfare state did not come about because this or that government needed to dictate and rule the masses but because the masses got wise to the fact that those who kept them in shit subservient conditions were basically a bunch of corrupt on the make crooks.

  15. I am going to rebut your nonsense point by point again in a pm, don't run away again this time. I hate character limits.

  16. …contd…"He is socially extremely right wing and politically authoritarian"
    Almost all authoritarian regimes in history have been left wing and there is nothing right wing about his social policies. His policies are Pan Arab nationalism and Baathism, an off shoot of Nasserism, which is left wing. Because someone is religious doesn't automatically mean they are right wing.

  17. I didn't say he was a socialist, I said he was far-left. Banks are nationalized in Iran with state banks own 80% of deposits. Oil is already nationalized and Ahmadinejad is on the record praising nationalization & Chavez's economic policies.
    "lowest Social welfare functions in Central Asia"
    I will need a source for that because I see something else when I look at Iran govt spending. Iran is ranked 111th in Economic Freedom by Fraser.

  18. I loved reading Free to Choose, not the phony left-wing "pro-choice" bs, but free to choose in all aspects and make your own decisions. Both economic and social freedoms.

  19. Ahmadinejad cut the interest rates on loans, subsidizes petrol and food, spends heavily on public transportation, infrastructure, welfare and public works programs. His economic policies are textbook far left wing.

  20. engine2truck6-A more accurate statement would be: all progressive republicans and democrats. The progressive philosophy was brought to america by european immigrants, especially the germans.

  21. Well, Scott. Maybe you should study something about the USSR, a socialist society, because your statement: "Socialism is by necessity democratic and opposed to centralized power and control "
    is such utterly nonsense that you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

  22. The idea that the natural rights of the INDIVIDUAL is the proper standard of justice, and the sole moral purpose of government Is the defense of individual RIGHTS is the classical Liberal American theory. It is the opposite of Socialism.

  23. @Scott Mullings : the Union of Soviest Socialist Republics was very centralized. And the Nazis were SOCIALIST. I know a Hitler Jungen very well, and she was taught Socialist principles in school, and the NAZI Party called themselves Socialists, not NAZI's. The idea that the standard of justice and all political action is for the betterment of Society is idea central to Bismarck, Marx, Mussolini, Hitler, FDR, and most Republicans and Democrats

  24. there is no paradox only a clear self-contradiction.Socialism is by necessity democratic and opposed to centralized power and control while Nazism is by necessity undemocratic based on hierarchical and authoritarian values and beliefs.One is free to choose to oppose one or the other but in order to choose freely one must first be in command of accurate information concerning one or other.It is clear you do not have that and so you fail to choose what is good when u see it

  25. "THE COMMON INTEREST BEFORE SELF-INTEREST"
    Sorry, but I'll take individual rights over collective rights any day.

  26. How about Chinese, Japanese, & East Asians who have higher overall IQ test scores than whites ? On what grounds would you discriminate against them ? By the way, National Socialism was more-or-less a free market system based on PRIVATE PROPERTY & right of the individual to hold private property, as long as it served the general interest

    Read the 25 Points of the NSDAP program, you white buffoon, before you run your mouth about how National Socialism was anti-Private-Property or free-market.

  27. THE COMMON INTEREST BEFORE SELF-INTEREST
    THAT IS THE SPIRIT OF THE PROGRAM. BREAKING OF THE THRALDOM OF INTEREST – THAT IS THE KERNEL OF NATIONAL SOCIALISM.

    From the 25 Points of the NSDAP program by Adolf Hitler & Anton Drexler, 1920.

    Keep that in mind as you watch this idiotic, misleading, dishonest & historically false video

    National Socialism is the antithesis & FURTHEST THING from bankster-funded Communism, whereas post-1913 Capitalism is the whore of USURY falsely believing it is free

  28. Pure capitalism and communism are in agreement in their ignorance of human realities. Both think borders are arbitrary social constructs, and that all of the races of mankind are the same. I wonder how many millions of low IQ Pakistani and Somalian immigrants it would take for many of these white free market types to start changing their tune and wake up to reality.

  29. So tired of this "Hitler and Stalin were the same" schtick. Nazi Germany had to force Jews to leave at gunpoint (or by paying their way to Palestine), whereas Stalin's Russia had to force its own people to stay in Russia at gunpoint. Now what does that tell you.

  30. The original "conservatives" and "right-wing" was pro-monarchy and statist. The original "libertarians" were anarcho-communist, against states, capitalism and markets. "liberals" were for a limited state and supported freer markets. It's amazing how these words have completely lost their meaning, at least in the U.S. but look at the history of the actual words. look up "Joseph Dejacque" the person who invented the word "libertarian".

  31. Why does everyone say that if you are libertarian you are left wing? I don't think you would say that Obama is a libertarian he is a socialist.

    Libertarians want freedom. I hear Right wing supporters also calling for freedom. Sure there are many Republicans that want big government but they aren't true conservatives. Libertarians I see as being more right wing.

  32. The American republican party uses anti-bourgeois populist language against "elitists" and academia, supports protectionist presidents like Reagan and the increase in the oppressiveness and size of the state, but they are still right-wing. You have a point in a sense because by the standards of today's libertarians, Friedman himself is far-left, supporting a negative income tax and active monetary policy by central banks.

  33. The Nazis persecuted the Communists, not because they were politically opposed to them (i.e. right-wing) they persecuted them because the communists were stealing followers from the National Socialist German Workers Party (the Nazis proper name). They were simply eliminating the competition. The communists were just further to the Left than the Nazis. Look at the Nazi party platform from the 30's and you'll clearly see these weren't a bunch of right wing conservatives.

  34. The Nazis emerged largely from the Freikorps, the ultra-right German paramilitaries that were fighting and killing communists years before Hitler's rise. Communists and social democrats were persecuted before the holocaust in Germany, they were clearly a movement of the right.

  35. What a bullshit, it's probably video for brain washed people without any knowlege of the history etc. The ideology of communism is total different from ideology of German national socialism, just read the book of Karl Marx '' Kapital '' and the book of Adolf Hitler '' Mein Kampf '', many people living now in the so called modern democratic Russia dream to go back in the Soviet-Union. it's much easier to prove that capitalism and fascism is the same-the strongest may live, the others must die.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *