The-Morality-of-Capitalism-PDF

Welfarism: The Unchosen ObligationThe fundamental premise of welfarism is that people have rights togoods such as food, shelter, and medical care. They are entitled tothese things. On this assumption, someone who receives benefitsfrom a government program is merely getting what is due him, inthe same way that a buyer who receives the good he has paid for ismerely getting his due. When the state dispenses welfare benefits,it is merely protecting rights, just as it is when it protects a buyeragainst fraud. In neither case is there any necessity for gratitude.The concept of welfare rights, or positive rights as they areoften called, is modeled on the traditional liberal rights of life,liberty, and property. But there is a well-known difference. Thetraditional rights are rights to act without interference from others.The right to life is a right to act with the aim of preservingoneself. It is not a right to be immune from death by naturalcauses, even an untimely death. The right to property is the rightto buy and sell freely, and to appropriate unowned goods fromnature. It is the right to seek property, but not a right to a dowryfrom nature, or from the state; it is not a guarantee that one willsucceed in acquiring anything. Accordingly, these rights imposeon other people only the negative obligation not to interfere,not to restrain one forcibly from acting as he chooses. If I imaginemyself removed from society—living on a desert island, forexample—my rights would be perfectly secure. I might not livelong, and certainly would not live well, but I would live in perfectfreedom from murder, theft, and assault.By contrast, welfare rights are conceived as rights to possessand enjoy certain goods, regardless of one’s actions; they are rightsto have the goods provided by others if one cannot earn themoneself. Accordingly, welfare rights impose positive obligationson others. If I have a right to food, someone has an obligationto grow it. If I cannot pay for it, someone has an obligation tobuy it for me. Welfarists sometimes argue that the obligation isimposed on society as a whole, not on any specific individual. Butsociety is not an entity, much less a moral agent, over and aboveits individual members, so any such obligation falls upon us asindividuals. Insofar as welfare rights are implemented through73