Discuss how far sociologists would agree that the welfare state has been successful in reducing poverty.
How to approach this question
Structure your answer as a debate.
1. Introduction: Define the welfare state and state that its success is debated by sociologists.
2. Argument FOR success: Explain the social democratic view (Beveridge Report, safety net, tackling the 'five giants').
3. Argument AGAINST success (from the left): Explain the Marxist critique (tool of capitalism, benefits kept low, doesn't tackle root causes).
4. Argument AGAINST success (from the right): Explain the New Right critique (dependency culture, underclass, Murray).
5. Conclusion: Summarise the different viewpoints and offer a justified judgement on 'how far' it has been successful (e.g., successful against absolute poverty but not relative poverty).
Full Answer
This question requires an evaluation of the welfare state from different sociological and political perspectives. A good answer will outline the initial aims of the post-war welfare state (based on the Beveridge Report) and the social democratic view that it has been a success. It will then contrast this with two major critiques. The Marxist critique sees the welfare state as a functional part of capitalism that does not truly challenge inequality. The New Right critique (from the 1980s onwards) sees the welfare state as a cause of social problems like dependency and family breakdown. A strong answer will explain these different viewpoints clearly and come to a balanced conclusion about the welfare state's overall impact on poverty.
Common mistakes
Only presenting one viewpoint, usually a simple pro- or anti-welfare argument. Confusing the Marxist and New Right critiques. Not distinguishing between absolute and relative poverty.
Expert