How Central Is the Middle? Middle Class Discourses and Social Policy Design in Germany

Chapter
Part of the Logic, Argumentation & Reasoning book series (LARI, volume 17)

Abstract

When it comes to assessing the status of the welfare state or the necessity of political reforms, in many countries the middle class serves as a major point of reference. In such debates, the middle class and the welfare state typically constitute an ambivalent relationship as the middle class is both financing and benefiting from the systems of social security. The middle class is therefore a particularly important target group to secure the functioning of social policies and the long-term stability of welfare institutions. At the same time, however, the socio-structural boundaries, the interests and the normative meaning of “the middle class” are not objectively given but find their way into political discourses and decisions through specific ways of perception and interpretation. As regards the design of social policies, “the middle class” can therefore be expected to serve as a major landmark for political orientation while at the same time it is open to a variety of meanings. Starting from here, the chapter investigates for the case of Germany how, firstly, “the middle class” becomes a meaningful discursive category in public debates and, secondly, how these discourses leave their marks in the design of social policies. By building on newspaper articles, we aim at identifying the discursive practices of constructing “the middle class” which then function as a major yardstick in political processes, both as an explicit target of welfare policies and as an implicit point of reference for negotiating “appropriate” policy designs.

Keywords

Middle class Social security Discourses Media Policy design 

References

  1. Baldwin, P. (1990). The politics of social solidarity: Class bases of the European welfare state, 1875–1975. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barbehön, M., & Haus, M. (2015). Middle class and welfare state – Discursive relations. Critical Policy Studies, 9(4), 473–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barbehön, M., Geugjes, M., & Haus, M. (2016). Centring social and political spaces: Middle class discourses and social policy design. Paper for the ECPR general conference, 7–10 September 2016, Prague.Google Scholar
  4. Barbehön, M., & Geugjes, M. (2018). Caught in the middle? Welfare state Legitimisation and Problematisation in German and Swedish Middle-class discourse. International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society. online first.Google Scholar
  5. Bastow, S., & Martin, J. (2003). Third way discourse: European ideologies in the twentieth century. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Blomqvist, P. (2004). The choice revolution: Privatization of Swedish Welfare Services in the 1990s. Social Policy & Administration, 38(2), 139–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blum, S., & Kuhlmann, J. (2016). Crisis? What crisis? Restructuring the German welfare system in times of unexpected prosperity. In K. Schubert, P. d. Villota, & J. Kuhlmann (Eds.), Challenges to European welfare systems (pp. 133–158). Heidelberg/New York/Dordrecht/London: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bonoli, G., & Natali, D. (Eds.). (2012). The politics of the new welfare state. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Bothfeld, S., Sesselmeier, W., & Bogedan, C. (Eds.). (2012). Arbeitsmarktpolitik in der sozialen Marktwirtschaft: Vom Arbeitsförderungsgesetz zum Sozialgesetzbuch II und III (2nd ed.). Wiesbaden: Springer.Google Scholar
  10. Bourdieu, P. (1985). The social space and the genesis of groups. Theory and Society, 14(6), 723–744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Braunthal, G. (1999). The 1998 German Election. Gerhard Schröder and the politics of the New Middle. German Politics & Society, 17(1), 32–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bruttel, O. (2005). Delivering active labour market policy through vouchers: Experiences with training vouchers in Germany. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 71(3), 391–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Crouch, C., & Keune, M. (2012). The governance of economic uncertainty: Beyond the ‘new social risks’ analysis. In G. Bonoli & D. Natali (Eds.), The politics of the new welfare state (pp. 45–67). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. DIW. (2016). Mittlere Einkommen in Deutschland und den USA. In DIW Wochenbericht 18/2016. Berlin: Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung.Google Scholar
  15. Erikson, R., & Goldthorpe, J. H. (1992). The constant flux: A study of class mobility in industrial societies. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  16. Esping-Andersen, G. (1985). Politics against markets: The social democratic road to power. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  18. Fairclough, N. (1995). Media discourse. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
  19. Goodin, R. E., & Le Grand, J. (1987). Not only the poor: The middle classes and the welfare state. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  20. Groh-Samberg, O., Mau, S., & Schimank, U. (2014). Investieren in den Status: Der voraussetzungsvolle Lebensführungsmodus der Mittelschichten. Leviathan, 42(2), 219–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gronbach, S. (2012). Soziale Gerechtigkeitsleitbilder in der Arbeitsmarktpolitik – Von der Verteilung zur Teilhabe. In S. Bothfeld, W. Sesselmeier, & C. Bogedan (Eds.), Arbeitsmarktpolitik in der sozialen Marktwirtschaft: Vom Arbeitsförderungsgesetz zum Sozialgesetzbuch II und III (2nd ed., pp. 43–56). Wiesbaden: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hajer, M. A. (1995). The politics of environmental discourse: Ecological modernization and the policy process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Hastings, A., & Matthews, P. (2015). Bourdieu and the Big Society: Empowering the powerful in public service provision? Policy & Politics, 43(4), 545–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Haus, M. (2015). Mittelschicht und Wohlfahrtsstaat – Drei Deutungsmuster und ihre Relevanz für die Zukunft eines wohlfahrtsstaatlichen Grundkonsenses. Zeitschrift für Sozialreform, 61(2), 147–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Haus, M., & Lamping, W. (2010). New policies of middle class integration? Welfare state reforms in Germany and Sweden compared. Paper for the “ISA World Congress”, 11–17 July 2010, Gothenburg.Google Scholar
  26. Hilpert, D. (2012). Wohlfahrtsstaat der Mittelschichten? Sozialpolitik und gesellschaftlicher Wandel in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (1949–1975). Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Howarth, D., & Griggs, S. (2012). Poststructuralist policy analysis: Discourse, hegemony, and critical explanation. In F. Fischer & H. Gottweis (Eds.), The argumentative turn revisited: Public policy as communicative practice (pp. 305–342). Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kaufmann, M. (2013). Kein Recht auf Faulheit. Das Bild von Erwerbslosen in der Debatte um die Hartz-Reformen. Wiesbaden: Springer.Google Scholar
  29. Keller, R. (2011). The Sociology of Knowledge Approach to Discourse (SKAD). Human Studies, 34(1), 43–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Korpi, W. (1983). The democratic class struggle. Boston: Routledge & Keagan Paul.Google Scholar
  31. Laclau, E., & Mouffe, C. (2001). Hegemony and socialist strategy: Towards a radical democratic politics (Second ed.). London/New York: Verso.Google Scholar
  32. Lascoumes, P., & Le Galès, P. (2007). Introduction: Understanding public policy through its instruments – From the nature of instruments to the sociology of public policy instrumentation. Governance, 20(1), 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lessenich, S. (2009). “Neue Mitte”: Das Ende der Planwirtschaft. In R. Castel & K. Dörre (Eds.), Prekarität, Abstieg, Ausgrenzung: Die soziale Frage am Beginn des 21. Jahrhunderts (pp. 259–268). Frankfurt am Main: Campus.Google Scholar
  34. Lessenich, S. (2012). “Aktivierender” Sozialstaat: eine politisch-soziologische Zwischenbilanz. In R. Bispinck, G. Bosch, K. Hofemann, & G. Naegele (Eds.), Sozialpolitik und Sozialstaat (pp. 41–53). Wiesbaden: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Münkler, H. (2014). Die Entstehung des Mitte-Paradigmas in Politik und Gesellschaft. Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte, 49, 49–54.Google Scholar
  36. Nonhoff, M. (2006). Politischer Diskurs und Hegemonie. Das Projekt “Soziale Marktwirtschaft”. Bielefeld: Transcript.Google Scholar
  37. Pierce, J. J., Siddiki, S., Jones, M. D., & Schumacher, K. (2014). Social construction and policy design: A review of past applications. The Policy Studies Journal, 42(1), 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pierson, P. (Ed.). (2001). The new politics of the welfare state. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Rothstein, B. (1998). Just institutions matter. The moral and political logic of the universal welfare state. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sabatier, P., & Mazmanian, D. (1979). The conditions of effective implementation: A guide to accomplishing policy objectives. Policy Analysis, 5(4), 481–504.Google Scholar
  41. Schneider, A., & Ingram, H. (1993). Social construction of target populations: Implications for politics and policy. The American Political Science Review, 87(2), 334–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Schneidr, A. L., & Ingram, H. M. (Eds.). (2005). Deserving and entitled: Social constructions and public policy. Albany: State University of New York.Google Scholar
  43. Schneider, A. L., Ingram, H., & de Leon, P. (2014). Democratic policy design: Social construction of target populations. In P. A. Sabatier & C. M. Weible (Eds.), Theories of the policy process (3rd ed., pp. 105–149). Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  44. Schram, S. F. (1993). Postmodern policy analysis: Discourse and identity in welfare policy. Policy Sciences, 26(3), 249–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Schram, S. F. (2012). The deep semiotic structure of deservingness: Discourse and identity in welfare policy. In F. Fischer & H. Gottweis (Eds.), The argumentative turn revisited: Public policy as communicative practice (pp. 236–268). Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Seeleib-Kaiser, M. (2002). A dual transformation of the German Welfare State? West European Politics, 25(4), 25–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Stone, D. A. (2012). Policy paradox: The art of political decision making. New York/London: W. W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
  48. Taylor-Gooby, P. (Ed.). (2004). New risks, new welfare: The transformation of the European welfare state. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Ullrich, C. G. (2004). Aktivierende Sozialpolitik und individuelle Autonomie. Soziale Welt, 55(2), 145–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wacquant, L. J. (1991). Making class: The middle class(es) in social theory and social structure. In S. G. McNall, R. F. Levine, & R. Fantasia (Eds.), Bringing class back in: Contemporary and historical perspectives (pp. 39–64). Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  51. Wahrman, D. (1995). Imagining the middle class: The political representation of class in Britain, c. 1780–1840. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Yanow, D. (2003). Constructing “race” and “ethnicity” in America: Category-making in public policy and administration. Armonk: M.E. Sharpe.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Heidelberg University - Institute of Political ScienceHeidelbergGermany

Personalised recommendations