What is the drain of the wealth theory

The scarcity problem as a whole in social work Personal assistance Fairy tales open doors

Transcript

1 Social work The problem of scarcity in social work 282 Personal assistance 289 Fairy tales open doors 294 Europeanizations in social planning and social work

2 Social Work Journal for Social and Socially Related Areas August Volume The problem of scarcity in social work System-theoretical coping with non-help: An answer to Heiko Kleve Norbert Wohlfahrt, Bochum DZI column Personal assistance Self-determined (continued) living for people with acquired disabilities Jessica Lilli Köpcke, Leipzig fairy tales open doors Results of the accompanying study on storytelling for refugee children in Saxony Ingrid Kollak; Stefan Schmidt; Marie Wöpking, Berlin Europeanizations in Social Planning and Social Work Nikolaus Dimmel, Salzburg Rundschau General Social 308 Health 308 Youth and Family 309 Training and Profession 310 Conference Calendar Bibliography Magazines Reviews Publishers Discussion The discussion that Heiko Kleve initiated with his essay on the economy of social work in April 2015 has continued. Norbert Wohlfahrt picks up the thread and uses the scarcity problem to argue that the application of purely market-based categories to cover the social sector is not sufficient, but rather involves the problem of failure to provide assistance. A special target group of social work are people with a handicap that has happened to them in the course of their lives. In her article, Jessica Lilli Köpcke describes the freedoms these people gain through personal assistance, but she also shows the problems that can arise through assistance. Music is generally assumed to be a universal language, and it is apparently similar with fairy tales. Ingrid Kollak, Stefan Schmidt and Marie Wöpking have investigated what effect telling fairy tales has on children who live in refugee accommodation in Saxony and found that this theater education measure has a high potential for integration. Nikolaus Dimmel reports as part of our series Social Work in Europe on the legal basis of Europeanization in social planning and social work. The focus of his contribution is on the presentation of the situation in Austria. The editorial team for social work EDITORIAL 281 Self-published by the German Central Institute for Social Issues

3 282 The Scarcity Problem of Social Work Cope with Systems Theory Through Non-Help: An Answer to Heiko Kleve 1 Norbert Wohlfahrt Summary Heiko Kleves (2015) essay on the relationship between economy and social work not only fails to determine the economic peculiarities of social work, Kleve claims at the same time a problem of scarcity, the state production of which he ignores and simply constructs as an expression of economic activity. This contribution argues against the polemical interest with which Kleve asserts the public austerity obligation as rational for an economy of social work and contradicts the position that welfare state austerity policy is an instrument for increasing the common good of all. Abstract Heiko Kleve s (2015) essay concerning the relationship of economy and social work failed not only in terms of the economic specifics of social work, it also claims a problem of lack of resources as characteristic of every form of economy. This article argues against the polemic interest in Kleve s statement, in which he claims austerity as a rational method for the economy of social work and the increase of common welfare for all. Keywords social work, economic system, capitalism, neoliberalism, criticism 2015): These spring from their cause and their specific design based primarily on a sovereign purpose of the welfare state, which it asserts as its claim against the demanders, without the wishes and interests of the beneficiaries, analogous to the customer orientation in the context of a regular, purely market-mediated service relationship, the real ones Provide a starting point or yardstick for action. Not economically, because those in need usually do not have the appropriate solvency (this applies from compensatory youth welfare to looking after children in day-care centers and caring for the elderly), which is why the demand for these services is predominantly or exclusively state-funded or shaped becomes. From a factual point of view, too, it must be stated that the type and scope of these benefits are legally regulated in detail in twelve social security codes, i.e. are stipulated in advance. As the welfare state operates social services (from health to care) within the framework of a public economy that is financed by it and subject to its regulations, it also becomes clear that these in principle elude business calculations determined by private capital. Like other areas of state-organized infrastructure policy, social services are also services of the state to the property and competition society that it enforces and guarantees, which would not by itself bring about the necessary social services. In the area of ​​social services, the welfare state also pursues the concern of organizing the supply services it provides as a business sphere. Kleve's wrong determination of the economic peculiarities of social work If one considers social work as a personal service, as is currently the case (on the criticism Maus 2015), then an economic definition of social work must first of all deal with the economic peculiarities of social service production (Dahme; Wohlfahrt 1 For a fundamental criticism of the overall context of the current problems of social work claimed by Kleve, I refer to my book Social Service Policy, a critical inventory, written together with Heinz-Jürgen Dahme (Dahme; Wohlfahrt 2015). The example of the health market shows that the provision of solvency is not left to the private demand of consumers, but the health business only works because part of the wage income of the working population is forcibly collectivized Hospital budgets are not the result of a private capitalistically calculated investment, but rather solvency established by the welfare state. Social work (in professional and organizational

4 systematic form) is only produced by the welfare state through the state-organized financing of social services and is therefore not only dependent on the economic cycles of state social policy (if, for example, inclusion work is put on the agenda and other things are less financed), but also on economic business cycles and other crises ( for example the current financial crisis), which are causally responsible for the fact that state revenues, such as those used to finance public tasks, fluctuate or even decline. The type and scope of the financing of social services is in turn explained by the general purpose to which the welfare state is subject: The welfare state refers to a society that is determined by the opposition between wage labor and capital and whose political and economic purpose it is through the Use of gainful employment to increase social wealth. Kleve ignores this welfare state connection of the financing of social work and presents it as part of a self-regulating subsystem of the economy, which is about a form of exchange of scarce resources in a market that organizes itself through price and money mechanisms (Kleve 2015, p . 125) to produce. With this, Kleve constructs an equation of social work with other differentiated functional systems that he calls this. The inappropriateness of determining social facts by abstracting from their peculiarities leads to the fact that social work is defined as a differentiated functional system that realizes its entire mode of operation according to its own, respectively specialized criteria (ibid.). With this approach, based on Luhmann's system theory, which consists in disregarding all peculiarities of the designated objects in order to equate them with the modes of operation of other functional systems (law, politics, etc.), one did not receive a theoretical definition of social work, but it did a moral message: capitalism is not the problem for social work, but a possible solution with regard to special functional problems of professional help (ibid.). At this point we do not yet know what problem professional help should have at all, it will be the Werther effect Nice, Würzburg, Munich, Ansbach four attacks in Europe shake us within just ten days in July Of course we try to solve them To explain terror series in order to arrive at new certainties and certainties. It's not easy. All four perpetrators, 17, 18, 27 and 31 years old, were at least temporarily undergoing psychological treatment. Two of them were refugees, the other two were born in Germany and France, respectively, with a family migration background. Until shortly before the crimes, none of the attackers was conspicuously religious, reports the media from their personal environment. There is some evidence that mental instability is a major common characteristic of such lone perpetrators. What is fatal is that violent Islamism is apparently very successful at the moment in persuading people with such a personality how they can give a devastating act of violence a supposedly higher meaning. The psychologist and author Ahmad Mansour puts this in a nutshell: Salafists are currently the better social workers. If you talk to social workers, they report many cases of severely traumatized and psychologically problematic clients who they currently have to look after, especially among refugees, and make it clear how inadequate or unsuccessful the offers of help for them have been so far. Another pattern seems to be the imitation of attacks that have already been carried out. The journalist Hajo Schumacher recently pointed out an exciting parallel: In January 1775, the Leipzig City Council banned the sale of the Goethe work Die Leiden des Junge Werther. This encouraged numerous unstable young men to take their own lives, and the reports of each case resulted in further suicides. In order to contain such a Werther effect, we still need a pronounced sense of responsibility in public and social media today. Burkhard Wilke DZI COLUMN 283

5 284 but found out a little later: As far as money is concerned, the welfare state is becoming too expensive, Kleve's spiritual foster father, Niklas Luhmann, announced in the 1980s, thus setting the dogma that Kleve's further explanations are based on: social work is coming The state is too expensive and needs to be replaced on a large scale by more personal responsibility. Kleve's wrong definition of the economy as a system of scarcity regulation and his consequent construction of the financing logic of social work. Traditionally, the object of economics is the declaration of the wealth of nations (Adam Smith). It is the merit of classical political economy to overcome the wealth theory developed by the physiocrats, which explains the surplus value from land rent, and to explain all forms of wealth and all independent forms in which it exists with the labor theory of value: the classical Economics now found that the value of a commodity is determined by the work it contains and required for its production (Engels 1972, p. 204). Political economy according to Marx is essentially shaped by the attempt to refute the labor theory of value he developed: Neoclassics is essentially devoted to the so-called transformation problem, i.e. the question of how values ​​turn into prices. The theory of value assumes a determination of the market price as an explanatory goal (Böhm-Bawerk 1914). The fact that the market price also includes factors other than the applied working time is understood as a contradiction to the theory of labor value and thus the distinction between use value and exchange value, which is essential for classical political economy, is called into question. The neoclassic is essentially a price theory (Henning 2005) that measures the value of a good on the market according to the sum that the buyer is willing to pay for the last piece of this variety. In contrast to (objective) labor theory of value, neoclassical theory (which still determines the mainstream in economics today) only knows subjective factors (benefits, interests, preferences) that explain parameters such as demand, wages, interest and profit. The counter-concept of neoclassics falls not only behind Marx, but also behind the knowledge of classical political economy. The definition of the economy as a system of scarcity regulation (Kleve 2015, p. 125) is the logical extension of this point of view into economics. It is no longer a matter of explaining the particular form of wealth production (and the associated manifestations of poverty), but of establishing general principles about economic activity. The consequent abstraction from the purpose of capitalist economy (profit) and the means used for this purpose (gainful employment) leads to the construction of a relationship between needs and goods in which an almost insatiable need is always opposed to a limited amount of goods. As if there were no money that separates the consumer from the goods as a means of payment, a glutton is constructed, the main problem of which is to always want more than is available in supply. Kleve adopted the dogma of a fundamentally insurmountable discrepancy between the means of satisfying needs and needs from economics and relates it directly to social work, to which he assumes the purpose of dealing effectively and efficiently with limited resources (ibid.). From a factual point of view, however, this is not the task of social work either: the control of production, distribution and financing of social services still takes place according to (socio) political guidelines between the state financier, who is therefore often a monopoly buyer, and in Germany on the basis of the principle of subsidiarity. Because market and competition mechanisms fail in this area (Finis Siegler 1997), it is then the task of the state to create the legal, financial and infrastructural prerequisites, whereby it usually delegates the actual implementation to third parties (non-profit and private organizations). In principle, it would be possible to organize the supply and demand of social services, like other personal services, via the market. However, with regard to the social policy objectives, price control would only result in a level of care geared to specific needs and appropriately solvent recipient groups. The functionality of limited resources for the professionalism of social work claimed by Kleve

6 (Helping people to help themselves works best through non-help) is essentially not a statement about social work, but the repetition of a well-known criticism by the cost bearers of the service providers and their economic self-interests. The economic function of these agencies, however, is completely different from that which Kleve subordinates to social work: They are, and the entire competition system of the European Union supports this, part of a growth-promoting social economy and are therefore understood as social enterprises, like any other capitalist enterprise make a contribution to the growth of the national economy with their activities. The contradiction between scarce state dough and the search for alternative sources of finance that enable growth is constitutive for this type of economic agent. Kleve's complaints about the economic financing logic of social work, which rewards output instead of outcome, therefore misses the point. It is quite functional for this type of economy if the impact indicators measure the number of people being cared for, the number of residential accommodation, or the number of those released from prison in work. For the local social welfare agencies, the outcome is defined as the termination of the receipt of aid with a view to their poor clientele, and Kleve considers this point of view to be so economically rational that he wants to transfer it to the entire social economy. Kleve's false justification for the sovereign debt crisis and the affirmative derivation of the state's austerity policy resulting from it. For Kleve, the financial crisis has intensified the problem of state over-indebtedness to such an extent that the state has no choice but to find and realize potential savings.Here, too, Kleve is uninterested in the actual economic connection between the sovereign debt crisis and the resulting austerity policy: The euro crisis, the European version of the international financial and sovereign debt crisis, and the way it has been handled so far show that the European states are trying with all their might to remove the label from their debt policy trustworthy by showing, through one community action after another, a willingness to continue indebtedness. At the same time, austerity programs are being adopted in all states, some of which represent massive cuts in wages and pensions, unemployment and massive cuts in social budgets, and which at the same time express that they are only a fraction of the ever new national debt in the financial markets is pumped. Austerity policy is also currently the preferred measure against the consequences of the financial and sovereign debt crisis in other countries outside the EU and Europe. Parallel to a policy that supplies the markets with cheap money without end, because economic growth does not want to occur at all, the demand for state financial and budget discipline dominates the inner-European political debate. Europe's politicians are now dealing very publicly with what they see as the increasingly problematic relationship between the common currency and national sovereignty and are developing reform proposals that until recently seemed unthinkable, such as the plan recently presented by the German finance minister to reform national budgets to control and approve the newly created, all-powerful EU budget commissioner with authority. The handling of the euro crisis leads to the establishment of an austerity policy across Europe which is an attempt to fend off the speculative attack of the financial markets against the euro through budget consolidation and the legally anchored debt brake. The fiscal pact is the intended instrument by which all countries are forced to legally anchor a debt brake in national politics. The implementation of this policy shows that it further aggravates the contrast between countries, which, like Germany, have promoted their national growth with a combination of high productivity and a simultaneous low-wage policy, and the low-growth (southern European) countries. The German accumulation model (with its strong export orientation) needs the euro as the basis of its growth policy and at the same time, by enforcing the austerity policy, limits the possibilities of the low-growth countries to establish something like their own model of regaining competitiveness in the first place. The financial crisis and its resolution in Europe make it clear that with the 285th

7 286 euros a transnational economic area has emerged and the EU has given itself a means of asserting its interests on world markets with the currency, but the national economies in the EU area see the euro primarily as an instrument for strengthening their respective national competitiveness that need to be strengthened at the expense of the other Euro and EU countries. The balance of current European crisis management policy shows that there has been a significant increase in the instability of national models of capitalist development, which in some countries are already having dramatic economic and social consequences. The (still) solvent euro states deny their partners (mostly located on the southern periphery) sovereignty over a sovereign monetary policy and now even a sovereign budget policy by demanding budget discipline. The crisis is intensifying as the EU is issuing recommendations as part of its Europe 2020 strategy to manage the crisis and deficit national budgets, some of which have the character of a directive. It is recommended to rehabilitate budgets, streamline social programs and develop an activating labor market and workfare policy based on the German model, which in total then contributes to the impoverishment of ever wider sections of the population, but in particular to increasing unemployment among young people. The financial crisis is not about saving banks and national budgets (Kleve 2015, p. 123), nor about achieving a balanced relationship between tax income and welfare state expenditure (ibid.). Kleve's German-national view of the financial crisis and its monetary policy consequences could be irritated simply by knowing the extent of the welfare state wrecking ball in the southern European countries, in which helping people to help themselves through non-help produces unemployment rates of over 50 percent among young people. Kleve's wrong definition of the professionalism of social work and the ideal of a rationally acting state bureaucracy Kleve could have saved himself the detour via the (wrong) definition of its economy for his criticism of the financing of social work. In essence, he is concerned with questioning individual legal entitlements in the triangular relationship under social law and replacing them with forms of control of the social bureaucracy, which open up more room for maneuver that controls the financial and help process (Gerlach; Hinrichs 2014, Wohlfahrt 2015a). Kleve falls back on concepts that see themselves as an alternative to individual aid and are therefore currently in business because they see themselves as an alternative and not as a supplement (Wohlfahrt 2015b, Heintz 2015). At the center of the criticism of the concept of social space orientation are the legally regulated claims for help and the related institutionalization and specialization of the existing help system, which is then judged to be too expensive in relation to the costs caused by it. An important local political motivation for the new social space orientation is therefore the implementation of changed forms of financing outside of the triangular relationship under social law. This triangular relationship constitutes a legal claim for those affected, compliance with which must be guaranteed and financed by the cost bearers. In contrast, financing through grants or mutual contracts is a means of escaping the regime of the triangular relationship under social law: Social space orientation by means of lump-sum grants or mutual contracts, but in any case through budgets, makes social benefits almost automatically subject to a financing reservation (74 para. 3 sentence 1 SGB VIII : within the budget available) (Gerlach; Hinrichs 2014, p. 32). Kleve's criticism of the welfare state and its forms of financing, as well as his proposal to replace them with social space orientation and budgeting, has very little to do with the linkage to the economy that he complains about: he advocates strong cost carriers who have as few legal obligations as possible to finance (such as Kleve's liberal role models Hayek and von Mises also have the ideal of a state bureaucracy that acts as independently of self-interests as possible), but always only where the social is concerned: this is where it becomes clearest how the administration breaks away from its commitment to claims and falls behind what the rule of law means: The administration in the social area, to which the budget goes, is again regulatory administration in the original

8 sense [...] The administration in the social area should develop services in which those affected receive tailor-made help after the comprehensive case analysis, precisely regardless of the actual service claim (Roscher 2013, p. 178). Kleve's wrong definition of the welfare state and the ideal of a competitive society that solves its problems itself. The welfare state is the sovereign who, through its legislation, creates the basis for financing social work. Social work is (primarily) defined as personal casework, which is essentially geared towards giving people who have failed or are in danger of failing in a competitive society, support in coping (not: solving) their respective problem situation. The principle of helping people to help themselves (recently also referred to as personal responsibility) determines in many fields of action of social work the possibilities of action determined by the welfare state for social professions and occupations such as those of the welfare organizations employing them, and accordingly the methods of social work are primarily geared towards the implementation of this principle . The particular peculiarity of the definition of social work on this task is in the social legislation that it is not assigned a specific task, but its financing and design are subject to a variety of negotiation processes that are carried out between politicians (payers) and providers (service providers). Since the reforms of the federal government under Gerhard Schröder, the coverage of public needs has not been based on a state-determined deficit of available options for coping with individual life, but on the functional requirements of integrating as quickly as possible into the primary labor market. The appreciation of the self-determination of the citizen and his ability to influence the context of social work is the result of a withdrawal of the (local) state from the obligation to provide care and its transfer to the family and subsidiary social area. This form of state-enforced subsidiarity (i.e. the additional burden on families and reproductive communities that are already burdened) makes Kleve the positive starting point for his reflections on success-oriented case financing, whereby success is equated with the end of the receipt of aid in the sense of the welfare state agenda. The activation of everyday private self-help demanded by Kleve should not be understood as a cynical slogan that the poor should kindly help themselves, but is clad in the idealizing formula of a lifeworld that functions as a catchment basin for the failed. Kleve's polemic against individual aid, which only strengthens the financial basis of the provider, is just like his model, the discourse on social space orientation, characterized by the fact that it both abstracts from the needs defined by the welfare state and completely the possibilities of social work to influence these living conditions leaves indefinite. In fact, the implementation of such forms of help leads to people with existing needs disappearing from help plan processes and thus, from the point of view of the social bureaucracy, the goal of helping people to help themselves has been achieved. Master of Counseling in Hanover New part-time course from summer semester 2017 The postgraduate further education course Master of Counseling Marriage, Family and Life Counseling (EFL) of the KatHO NRW and the EFL in the Diocese of Hildesheim takes 8 semesters (5 to 6 attendance weekends / semester) ) to the recognized master’s degree. Info at: 287

9 288 In the world of the idealists of a self-sufficient care community, there is no competitive society, the losers of which enjoy welfare state custody, but social assistance providers who cannot provide adequate economic incentives by means of their case-related forms of financing. It is one of the peculiarities of this form of partisan moral thinking that it does not criticize those who actually determine the living environment (companies, landowners, public authorities of infrastructure policy, etc.) because it considers their interests to be the determining factors. However, the interests of those who organize the social work, whose training Kleve lives from, under state-created scarcity conditions, are considered to be one-sidedly economically oriented and therefore inadequate for the successful operation of independent organizations (Kleve 2015, p. 126). Conclusion Of course, the social work staff and their financing (let alone their changes in recent years, Stolz-Willig; Christoferidis 2011) play just as little role in the considerations of a scarcity-regulated economy of social work as the question of how we ourselves because we have to present an economy in which scarcity is regulated in such a way that added value can arise for all sides. Anyone who, like Kleve, believes that the autopoiesis of self-referential systems is an appropriate description of contemporary capitalism, for whom the vast sums of money on the financial exchanges for capital assets looking for a profitable investment and the hardship of German welfare recipients add up to a community of fate that realizes their added value. Kleve accuses critics of a political economy of social work, who point out that limited resources are only dealt with where the welfare state perceives its clientele as too expensive, of having a utopian understanding of how limited resources are dealt with. It seems downright ridiculous when such statements resist the accusation of being disqualified as neoliberal instead of proudly sticking this label on your own chest. The irritation triggered by Kleve's polemic can, however, also be read as a criticism of a trivializing accusation of economization: it is the partiality of interested thinking that no longer wants to gain access to the matter, does not want to explain facts, but wants to denounce them from an ideal state standpoint that calls for counter-speech. And it is the cynical attitude with which, based on system theory, of all people, more personal responsibility is recommended to those who have failed in a competitive society, because there is simply no more money for them that annoys them. But please: It's not neoliberal. Professor Dr. Norbert Wohlfahrt, qualified social worker, has been teaching social management, administration and organization at the Evangelical University of Applied Sciences Rhineland-Westphalia-Lippe since 1993. E-Mail: Literature Böhm-Bawerk, E .: Power or economic law? Journal for Economics, Social Policy and Administration, Volume 23. Vienna 1914 Dahme, H.-J .; Wohlfahrt, N .: Social service policy a critical inventory. Wiesbaden 2015 Engels, F .: Marx Engels Works, Volume 22. Berlin 1972 Finis Siegler, B .: Economics of social work. Freiburg im Breisgau 1997 Gerlach, F .; Hinrichs, K .: Social space orientation instead of educational support: a technical concept as a savings program. In: Dialog Erziehungshilfe 3/2014, S Heintz, M .: Social space and social space orientation. In: Forum Sozial 3/2015, S Henning, C .: Philosophy according to Marx 100 years of Marx reception and the normative social philosophy of the present in criticism. Bielefeld 2005 Kleve, H .: The Economy of Social Work On the ambivalent relationship between money and help. In: Soziale Arbeit 4/2015, S Maus, F .: Terms as symbols of the economization of social work. In: Forum Sozial 3/2015, S Roscher, F .: Case Management as an independent form of action in public administration? In: Case Management 4/2013, S Stolz-Willig, B .; Christoferidis, J. (Ed.): Mainly cheap? Precarisation of work in the social professions. Münster 2011 Wohlfahrt, N .: Subsidiarity principle welfare mix New subsidiarity from individual legal entitlement to benevolent administrative action? In: Theory and Practice of Social Work 5 / 2015a, S (com / fileadmin / dam / hefte / 2015 / pdf-files / tup_heft_5 _2015_Wohlfahrt_high 2_.pdf, accessed on) Wohlfahrt, N .: Sozialraumorientierung From individual aid to flat-rate remuneration. In: Kompass 3 / 2015b, pp. 8-13