Comments on: The Savior State

By: People Are Talking About Republicans Again! | Article VI Blog | John Schroeder

Tue, 02 Feb 2010 13:38:27 +0000

[...] the president, nor the state in general can be a Savior. But a lot of people confuse the two. That’s the rel problem [...]

By: Mary Raitt

Mary Raitt — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 20:29:59 +0000

I saw a little ceremony in a central London churchyard. An 18th century parishioner had left a fund for the poor on condition that there be prayers at his grave every year. The priest said, “We now believe that the state, not individual benefactors, must take care of the poor as a right, not as a gift.” I feel that there is no longer any obligation or gratitude among individuals or any groups smaller than the all
powerful state.

By: Anna

Anna — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 04:46:58 +0000

I’m surprised Farrow never mentions Tocqueville! The savior state sounds a lot like a more religious version of Tocqeville’s “soft despotism.” Each “presents itself as the people’s guardian, as the guarantor of the citizen’s well-being” and “not only sees to the security of its territory and the enforcement of its laws but also promises to feed, clothe, house, educate, monitor, medicate, and in general to care for its people.”

By: Jordan

Jordan — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 16:11:56 +0000

Liam, one thing we agree on is that Farrow’s analysis lacks necessary comment on matters economic. I suggest taking a look at the PowerBlog link.

By: Liam

Liam — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 15:26:49 +0000

The Savior State arose in the US largely in response to the Savior Corporation. That is, in the 1860s, the nature of corporations changed in the US: before this time, they were chartered discretely, for limited purposes and limited periods of time, and their assets were valued in terms of hard value and less so in terms of intangibles and good will, and they did not have full constitutional personhood. In the Gilded Age, they became vast enterprises, not only more efficient at production but also in effecting the lives of ordinary citizens in myriad ways that resembled what a muscular state could do. Citizens, not only being producers and consumers but voters as well, responded in due course in their role as voters. The evolution of the state is, in this sense, part of the market, not aside from the market.