A Liberal Communitarian Defense of Basic Income*

Paper Submitted for Consideration by Theory and Society Janet Gouldner, Executive Editor 30 September 1 !

"avid #amane "epartment of Sociolo$y %niversity of &otre "ame '3( )lanner *all &otre "ame +& ,(--( .1 /(310!'3 yamane112nd1edu C3ris )assnac3t "epartment of Sociolo$y %niversity of 4isconsin 11!0 5bservatory "rive 6adison, 4+ -3'0( 7777777777 * 8n earlier version of t3is paper 9as presented at t3e annual meetin$ of t3e 8merican Sociolo$ical 8ssociation in 4as3in$ton, "1C1, 8u$ust 1 -1 :3an;s are due to Eri; 4ri$3t, "an *ausman, and <ernard #ac; for t3eir 3elpful comments on a previous draft1 :3is 9or; 9as supported by fello9s3ips from t3e 8merican Sociolo$ical 8ssociation 6inority 8ffairs Pro$ram =to t3e first aut3or> and t3e &ational Science )oundation =to t3e second aut3or>1

A Liberal Communitarian Defense of Basic Income

8<S:?8C:

Communitarianism correctly reco$ni@es t3at community is a $ood t3at 9e as members of society s3ould foster1 <ut $iven t3at 8merican society 9as founded upon liberal ideals, communitarian interests must be addressed a$ainst a bac;$round of fundamental individual ri$3ts1 8 liberal communitarian perspective reali@es bot3 of t3ese interests1 4e ar$ue from t3is perspective t3at a <asic +ncome =<+> $rant00an unconditional income paid to all on an individual basis, 9it3out means test or 9or; reAuirement00 is a defensible state policy because it can 3elp foster community, 93ile simultaneously protectin$ fundamental individual liberties1 <+ facilitates locally0or$ani@ed communities by reducin$ t3e impact of 93at *abermas calls economic and political system lo$ics on t3e internal or$ani@ation of communities1 <+ serves to miti$ate t3e destructive effect of mar;et forces on existin$ and potential communities and t3ereby affords t3em t3e space to develop ot3er bases of communal solidarity, suc3 as inclusiveness, eAuality, s3ared understandin$ and a notion of t3e common $ood1 <+ also does not reAuire t3at $overnment bureaucracies micro0mana$e t3e daily lives of community members, allo9in$ social bonds to arise from 9it3in communities rat3er t3an 9it3out1 )inally, <+ protects fundamental liberties by $ivin$ t3e individual t3e financial 93ere9it3al to 9it3dra9 from oppressive community relations3ips if necessary1

B#et, in practice111association, self03elp and community activity 3ave tended to flouris3 precisely 93ere some form of income 3as been provided for people, 9it3out correspondin$ 9or; obli$ations bein$ enforcedB =Jordan, 1 ! C13'>1 +ntroduction :3e core point of t3is paper is rat3er strai$3tfor9ardC 9e 9ant to ar$ue for a particular 9elfare pro$ram00a $uaranteed basic income00on t3e $rounds t3at it 9ill foster and support community 93ile simultaneously protectin$ individual liberties1 43ile direct, our position nonet3eless reAuires considerable Dustification and relies on premises not necessarily universally accepted, 93ic3 is not to say t3at 9e t3in; t3ey are not universally acceptable1 :3e maDor assumption 93ic3 $uides our ar$ument is t3at community is a good that we as members of society can and should foster 1 43ile 9e are stron$ supporters of community, 9e also reco$ni@e t3at 9e =8mericans> are currently committed to t3e ideal of a liberal society1 5ur communitarian concerns must be addressed a$ainst a bac;$round of fundamental individual ri$3ts and liberties1 :3erefore, 9e adopt 93at 9e call a Bliberal communitarianB perspective because it reali@es bot3 of t3ese interests1 8s sociolo$ists, 9e reco$ni@e t3at a normative political t3eory of Dustice suc3 as liberal communitarianism is not a sufficient foundation in and of itself upon 93ic3 to ar$ue for social 9elfare pro$rams1 4e see;, t3erefore, to mer$e our normative political t3eoretical interests 9it3 a social t3eory of modern industrial and democratic society1 5ur social t3eory focuses on t3e institutions of civil society as an area of free association distinct from and at times opposed to t3e state and t3e mar;et =i1e1, t3e economy>1 +n our vie9, liberal communitarianism su$$ests a social t3eory of civil society, and civil society informs a political p3ilosop3y of liberal communitarianism1 Political p3ilosop3y articulates an ideal vision of society 93ic3 9e can strive to attain, but t3at ideal can only be attained $iven a proper understandin$ of t3e 9or;in$s of society1 :3e normative assumptions and t3eoretical perspective 9e adopt su$$est t3at a liberal state should

encoura$e t3e development and maintenance of community1 43at remains to be seen is how t3e liberal state can do so1 4e 9ill ar$ue t3at a basic income is a defensible state policy because it can 3elp foster smaller, local communities =i1e1, t3ose c3aracteristic of civil society>, 93ile simultaneously protectin$ individual liberties1

Community Community is notoriously difficult to define1 8s ?obert <oot3 )o9ler =1 1C3> notes, B8 study of

t3irty years a$o spo;e of a 3undred definitions Eof communityFG 9e no9 reco$ni@e t3at t3ere are 3undreds1B 6ore 3umorously, Josep3 Gusfield =1 '-Cxiv> 3as noted t3at t3e various uses of community by sociolo$ists Bis probably confusin$ to t3e student Eof sociolo$yF1

43ic3 9ay is t3e sociolo$ist usin$ t3e 9ord, or is 3e or s3e usin$ it in some Auite novel senseH +f you bro9se in t3e library or t3e boo;s3op, you 9ill find boo;s 9it3 titles li;e The Quest for Community, Commitment and Community, Community Power Structure, The Community, The American Community, Community Studies 1 8t t3is point you may be tempted to drop all of t3em and run to your class in vertebrate anatomy 93ere at least you can matc3 9ords to tan$ible obDects, to t3in$s you can touc3 and feel and see1 :3e tibia and t3e ulna 9ill not differ from one anatomist to anot3er, but BcommunityB is not so static a concept1 ?eco$ni@in$ t3at BcommunityB 9ill never 3ave t3e referential precision of BtibiaB =Giddens 1 '(C13G 1 !'C1!01 >, 9e nonet3eless 9ill attempt to s;etc3 some boundaries for t3e concept, to delineate 9it3 adeAuate specificity 93at 9e mean by community1 +n surveyin$ t3e sociolo$ical literature in 1 '-, Gusfield found t3at t3ere 9ere t9o maDor uses of BcommunityBC B+n t3e first, t3e territorial, t3e concept appears in t3e context of location, p3ysical territory, $eo$rap3ical continuity1 111 :3e second usa$e, t3e relational, points to t3e Auality or c3aracter of 3uman relations3ips, 9it3out reference to locationB =xv0xvi>1 +n our vie9, any adeAuate definition of community 9ill necessarily incorporate bot3 t3e spatial and relational aspects of community1 5n t3e ri$3t trac; is :3omas <ender =1 !.C'> 93o 3as 9ritten t3at a community Binvolves a limited number of people in a some93at restricted social space or net9or; 3eld

to$et3er by s3ared understandin$s and a sense of obli$ation1B Jane 6ansbrid$e =1

3C3,0> adds some

detail to <enderIs broad brus3 stro;es 93en s3e defines community Bas a $roup in 93ic3 t3e individual members

can trust ot3er members more t3an t3ey can trust stran$ers not to Ifree rideI or IdefectI in social dilemmas, not to exploit t3e members of t3e $roup in ot3er 9ays, and, on occasion, to furt3er t3e perceived needs of ot3er members of t3e $roup rat3er t3an t3eir o9n needs1 :3e trust t3at so defines community derives from ties of love and duty creatin$ mutual obli$ation, from mutual vulnerability =includin$ vulnerability to ot3ersI sanctions>, from mutual understandin$ and sympat3y1 :3e stron$er t3e community, t3e stron$er are t3e ties of mutual obli$ation, vulnerability, understandin$, and sympat3y1 5ur sense of community, t3en, articulates more 9it3 t3e locally0or$ani@ed, face0to0face type of associations 93ic3 :ocAueville sa9 as central to 8merican democracy in t3e 1 t3 century t3an 9it3 t3e Bnational societyB or Bnational political communityB on 93ic3 many contemporary political t3eorists focus =e1$1, 4al@er 1 !3>1

Jiberal Communitarianism :3e contemporary revival of political p3ilosop3y is often attributed to t3e 1 '1 publication of Jo3n ?a9lsIs A Theory of Justice =6ul3all and S9ift 1 .C1>1 8lt3ou$3 BcommunitarianB critiAues of liberal

individualism can be traced =at least> as far bac; as t3e Jeft communitarianism of Jean0JacAues ?ousseau and t3e ?i$3t communitarianism of Edmund <ur;e and Josep3 de 6aistre =#ac; 1 1 3C,,G see also *olmes

3>, muc3 contemporary communitarianism in t3e %nited States 3as its roots in t3e practical discontent 1> and as a t3eoretical reaction to ?a9lsIs contractarian vie9 of distributive 3C.-G #ac; 1 3C,(0'G see 1>, Bt3e

of t3e 1 (0s =)o9ler 1

Dustice, 93ic3 is sometimes referred to as a Bne9 liberal paradi$mB =6ouffe 1

especially SandelIs E1 !., 1 !,F and 6ac+ntyreIs E1 !,F critiAues>1 8ccordin$ to )o9ler =1 dance 9it3 communityB occupies a central place in 8merican political t3ou$3t today1

8t t3is sta$e, t3ere seem to be antinomies bet9een t3ese t9o political p3ilosop3ies00liberalism and

communitarianism0093ic3 are unresolvable from 9it3in eit3er =Co3en and 8rato, 1 to 6ansbrid$e =1

.C!01->1 8ccordin$

3C33 >, B8dvocates of individualism tend to assume a @ero0sum $ame, in 93ic3 any

advance in community entails a retreat in protectin$ individuality1 8dvocates of $reater community tend to assume no tradeoff bet9een t3ese $oods, i$norin$ t3e 9ays community ties undermine individual freedom1 111 The challenge for most polities is to find ways of strengthening community ties while developing institutions to protect individuals from community oppression B =emp3asis ours>1 :a;in$ up t3e c3allen$e 6ansbrid$e identifies, 9e 9ould li;e to envision a t3ird, middle 9ay bet9een t3e antinomies of liberal and communitarian t3in;in$, a pat3 9e call Bliberal communitarianism1B1 4e a$ree 9it3 6ic3ael 4al@er =1 0>, amon$ ot3ers, t3at 8merica is a fundamentally liberal

society1 4e are not pure BclassicalB or BlibertarianB liberals =Jomas;y 1 !'CC31 -> or Banarc3istB liberals =&o@ic; 1 ',>, 3o9ever, as 9e believe t3ere are and s3ould be limits on individual liberty1 5ur vie9, in t3is sense, is closer to 93at Jomas;y =1 !'> calls B9elfare liberalism1B :o t3e extent 9e ad3ere to a liberalism, it is one t3at Bmaintains t3at individuals possess extensive positive claims on ot3ers 111 :3at is, 93atever reasons 9e 3ave to ac;no9led$e t3at individuals may not be interfered 9it3 are also reasons for 3oldin$ t3at individuals are entitled to aid from ot3ersB =Jomas;y 1 !'C!,>1 4al@er =1 0C(> 3as ar$ued t3at t3e communitarian critiAue of liberalism periodically and

c3ronically reappears00Bli;e t3e pleatin$ of trousersC transient but certain to returnB00precisely to point out t3e limits of classical liberalism1 4e t3erefore concur 9it3 8my GutmannIs =1 !-C3..> conclusion t3at Bt3e 9ort3y c3allen$e posed by t3e communitarian critics t3erefore is not to replace liberal Dustice, but to improve it1B 8s 9ell as anyone, 8llen <uc3anan =1 ! > 3as laid out t3e central tenets of suc3 an improved, communitarian liberal or liberal communitarian political p3ilosop3y, 93at 3e calls a BpessimisticB or BcautiousB as opposed to a ButopianB communitarianism =p1 !(0>1. :3e foundational bac;$round of 93at <uc3anan calls t3e Bliberal political t3esisB00as distinct from a liberal t3eory of t3e self, 3uman nature, or society =p1 !-.>00is t3at Bt3e state is to enforce t3e basic individual civil and political ri$3ts, t3ose 93ic3, rou$3ly spea;in$, are found in t3e %1S1 ConstitutionIs <ill

of ?i$3ts and in Jo3n ?a9lIs first principle of DusticeB =p1 !-,>1 :3is is t3e broad bac;$round of ri$3ts and liberties to 93ic3 9e refer above1 43atever 9elfare pro$rams 9e advocate, t3ey must be at least neutral 9it3 respect to t3is ideal and 3opefully 9ill be supportive of it1 8 point central to communitarian t3in;in$, accordin$ to <uc3anan, is t3at Ba $enuine community is not a mere association of individuals1 6embers of a community 3ave common ends, not merely con$ruent private interests, and t3ese are conceived of and valued as common ends by t3e membersB =p1 !-(0'>1 4e also a$ree 9it3 t3is statement and support community as a social $ood to be freely pursued by collectivities 9it3in t3e boundaries establis3ed by t3e aforementioned frame9or; of basic ri$3ts13 +t seems clear to us, as it does to <uc3anan, t3at Bt3e liberal political t3esis and t3e t3esis t3at community is a fundamental 3uman $ood 111 simply do not en$a$e and 3ence are not inconsistentB =p1 !-'>1 Kuite to t3e contrary in fact, ar$ues <uc3anan, since Bliberal individual ri$3ts provide valuable protections for t3e flouris3in$ of communityB =p1 !-!>1 +ndividuals 9it3 basic ri$3ts 3ave t3e freedom to enter into personal relations3ips 93ic3 may evolve into communities, and t3ey 3ave t3e option to exit communities 93ic3 t3ey deem oppressive or ot3er9ise unsatisfactory1 Existin$ or developin$ communities 3ave t3e ri$3t to noninterference by t3e state and economy provided t3at t3ey are not forcefully infrin$in$ upon individualsI ri$3ts1 <uc3anan also correctly notes t3at Beven if t3ere is a sense in 93ic3 community cannot be freely c3osen 111 individuals nevert3eless can and do freely c3oose to bind t3emselves to courses of action 93ic3 t3ey expect to create conditions under 93ic3 community 9ill emer$e1 +n t3at sense community can be freely c3osen, t3ou$3 c3osen indirectlyB =p1 !(!>1 4e 3ope to s3o9 by t3e end of our ar$ument t3at a sin$le 9elfare pro$ram00a $uaranteed basic income00is bot3 Dustifiable 9it3in t3e frame9or; of t3e liberal political t3esis and 9ill 3ave t3e conseAuence of fosterin$ community desired by communitarians, and is t3us an ideal liberal communitarian policy1

Social :3eoryC States, 6ar;ets, and Civil Society +n t3is section, 9e briefly outline a social t3eory of modern industrial society to compliment t3e

liberal communitarian political p3ilosop3y 9e Dust described1 5ur social t3eory attempts to move beyond t3e dic3otomous models for9arded by political scientists and economists =and per3aps some sociolo$ists> 93ic3 focus exclusively on t3e state and t3e economy, and usually on states versus mar;ets =e1$1, Epsin$0 8nderson, 1 !-G )riedman and )riedman, 1 0G Jindblom, 1 !!>1 4e 9ant to move beyond t3ese t9o

sector conceptions by introducin$ t3e concept of civil society, t3e institutions of 93ic3 are areas of free association distinct from and at times opposed to t3e state and t3e mar;et =i1e1, t3e economy>1

Toward a Three-Sector

odel, or !ringing Civil Society !ac" #n

)or t3e understandin$ of civil society 9e 9ant to develop, 9e are 3eavily indebted to t3e ambitious 9or; underta;en by Jean Co3en and 8ndre9 8rato =1 .aC,..,,.(> to BreconstructB t3e cate$ory Bcivil

societyB in a neo0*abermasian frame9or;1, 43ile 9e 9ill ultimately need to extend even t3eir effort to ensure a central place for community, t3eirs is an exceptional foundation on 93ic3 to build a social t3eory of civil society1 Co3en and 8rato be$in by acceptin$, as 9e do, t3at a t9o sector model of state and economy is an inadeAuate c3aracteri@ation of modern societies1 +n formulatin$ t3eir t3ree sector model, t3ey build upon t3e arc3itecture laid out by Jur$en *abermas =1 !'> in 3is magnum opus, The Theory of Communicative Action1 +n t3at 9or;, *abermas ma;es a met3odolo$ically dualistic distinction bet9een t3e BsystemB and t3e Blife9orld1B :3is dualistic frame9or; becomes tripartite, 3o9ever, 93en t3e system sp3ere is furt3er subdivided into t3e subsystems of t3e economy and t3e state =pp1 ,.(0.'>1 +n t3e life9orld/economy and state subsystems frame9or;, 9e 3ave an excellent vanta$e point from 93ic3 to point to t3e centrality of civil society and t3en of community in modern society1 4e 9ill discuss eac3 of t3ese concepts00life9orld, civil society, and community00in turn1 $ifeworld1 8ccordin$ to Co3en and 8ratoIs interpretation of *abermas, t3e Bcultural0lin$uistic bac;$roundB is Bt3e source of t3e underlyin$ unity of t3e 93ole life9orld complex1B :3is bac;$round Brefers to t3e reservoir of implicitly ;no9n traditions, t3e bac;$round assumptions t3at are embedded in

lan$ua$e and culture and dra9n upon by individuals in everyday lifeB =pp1 ,3,,,.'0.!>1 8s society moderni@es, t3e life9orld under$oes rationali@ation 93ic3 Binvolves a communicative openin$0up of t3e sacred core of traditions, norms, and aut3ority to processes of Auestionin$ and t3e replacement of a conventionally based normative consensus by one t3at is IcommunicativelyI $rounded 111 Communicative action,B for *abermas, Binvolves a lin$uistically mediated, intersubDective process t3rou$3 93ic3 actors establis3 t3eir interpersonal relations, Auestion and reinterpret norms, and coordinate t3eir interaction by ne$otiatin$ definitions of t3e situation and comin$ to an a$reementB =p1 ,3->1 +t is 9it3in t3is life9orld context t3at 9e 9is3 to situate civil society, and 3ence community1 Civil Society1 4olfe =1 ! > ta;es $reat pains to ar$ue t3at t3e distinctive c3aracteristic of civil society is t3at it is a realm in 93ic3 people 3ave t3e opportunity to or$ani@e t3eir moral obli$ations to one anot3er1 4e understand t3is to mean t3at it is precisely in t3e arena of civil society t3at people underta;e t3e lin$uistically mediated, intersubDective processes of self0coordination 93ic3 *abermas identifies 9it3 t3e life9orld1 :3e t3eoretical movement from life9orld to civil society is t3erefore one of concreti@ation1 %nfortunately, in many 9ays, a sin$ular concrete definition of Bcivil societyB is no easier to find t3an a sin$ular, clear definition of Bcommunity1B *abermas =1 nonet3eless adds t3at Bt3is muc3 is apparentC .C,-30-,> 3as noted t3is opacity, t3ou$3 3e

t3e institutional core of Bcivil societyB is constituted by voluntary unions outside t3e realm of t3e state and t3e economy and ran$in$ =to $ive some examples in no particular order> from c3urc3es, cultural associations, and academies to independent media, sport and leisure clubs, debatin$ societies, $roups of concerned citi@ens, and $rass0roots petitionin$ drives all t3e 9ay to occupational associations, political parties, labor unions, and Balternative institutions1B 8ll of t3ese activities, or$ani@ations, and associations are concrete institutions of civil society 9it3in t3e broad 3ori@on of t3e life9orld1 Community1 Community, 93ile encompassed by civil society, is not synonymous 9it3 it1 :3e activities 9e associate 9it3 civil society are not restricted to t3ose 9e associate 9it3 community1 So,

'

consider t3e variety of c3aracteristic actions and activities 93ic3 people underta;e in civil society1 4olfe =1 ! C1! > provides one suc3 list, ar$uin$ t3at in civil society people Ba$ree to serve on committees, run for local office,

9atc3 ot3er peopleIs c3ildren, contribute lavis3ly to potluc; dinners, clean up t3eir nei$3bor3oods, restrain t3eir 9a$e demands, 3onor one anot3er, observe traditions, 3ave and raise c3ildren, return boo;s to libraries, s3are facilities, marry for love, serve on Duries, refuse bribes, fasten t3eir seat belts, let ot3ers pass on t3e 3i$39ay, $ive to c3arities, donate blood, serve lar$er portions, tip stran$ers t3ey never expect to see a$ain, pay bac; debts, offer refu$e, 3elp friends, and volunteer for dirty and difficult Dobs1 E:3ey alsoF pay t3eir taxes 9illin$ly, support volunteer efforts, rely on social net9or;s, ta;e care of t3eir parents, and spend as muc3 time 9it3 t3eir c3ildren as t3ey can1 43ile many of t3ese actions and activities are part of community as 9e understand it =recallin$ our discussion of community above>, not all are1 )or example, and in particular, activities associated 9it3 family life003avin$ and raisin$ c3ildren, spendin$ as muc3 time 9it3 t3eir c3ildren as t3ey can00does not necessarily constitute or contribute to community1 5t3er activities 4olfe mentions, 93en considered separately and independently, may be motivated strictly by selfis3 concerns1 Surely refusin$ bribes may simply be for fear of bein$ cau$3t and not out of a spirit of community1 Similarly, a motorist in Jos 8n$eles 9ill li;ely Blet ot3ers pass on t3e 3i$39ayB in lar$e part to prevent inDury to t3eir person =even deat3L>, rat3er t3an out of a sense of ot3er0concern1 :3ese actions are indeed a part of civil society00bein$ neit3er coordinated by t3e state nor t3e mar;et00t3ou$3 t3ey are not necessarily aspects of community1 :3us, Dust as t3e life9orld is broader t3an and incorporative of civil society, so too is civil society broader t3an and incorporative of community1 )or t3e institutions and activities of civil society to constitute a community, t3ere needs to be 93at P3ilip Sel@nic; =1 .> calls comprehensiveness1 :3at is,

Ba $roup is a community to t3e extent t3at it encompasses a broad ran$e of activities and interests, and to t3e extent t3at participation implicates 93ole persons rat3er t3an se$mental interests or activitiesB =Sel@nic;, 1 .C3-!>1 :3us, 3avin$ and raisin$ c3ildren and spendin$ as muc3 time 9it3 t3ose c3ildren as

possible may be an inte$ral aspect of community, but it can only be so in combination 9it3 various ot3er

activities 93ic3 cross cut institutions of civil society1 )urt3ermore, accordin$ to Sel@nic; =1 .C3-!>, a frame9or; of s3ared beliefs, interests, and commitments unites a set of varied $roups and activitiesB into a community1 BSome are central, ot3ers are perip3eral, but all are connected by bonds t3at establis3 a common fait3 or fate, a personal identity, a sense of belon$in$, and a supportive structure of activities and relations3ips1 :3e more pat39ays are provided for participation in diverse 9ays and touc3in$ multiple interests 111 t3e ric3er is t3e experience of communityB =Sel@nic; 1 .C3-!0 >1

The Coloni%ation of the $ifeworld by System #mperatives 8s 9e 3ave seen, *abermas ar$ues t3at communicative action is t3e 3allmar; and promise of t3e life9orld 93ic3 is coordinated by lin$uistic media oriented to9ard mutual understandin$1 Communicative action in t3e life9orld stands in s3arp contrast to social action in t3e economic and political subsystems 93ic3 are coordinated by Bdelin$uisticalB mediaC money and po9er, respectively1 43ile t3ese coordinatin$ media are appropriate 9it3in eac3 sp3ere, a troublesome process 3as occurred durin$ t3e course of moderni@ation1 6odern societies 3ave seen, in *abermasIs =1 !'C3.-> famous p3rase, a Bcoloni@ation of t3e life9orld by system imperatives,B a Bmonetari@ation and bureaucrati@ation of everyday practices1B :3e media of money and po9er 3ave penetrated t3e life9orld and 3ence civil society to t3e detriment of bot3 =and necessarily to community as 9ell>1 Given t3e considerable abstraction of t3is t3eory t3us far, it is per3aps useful to turn to a 9or; 93ic3 is self consciously indebted to *abermasIs ar$ument about t3e Bcoloni@ation of t3e life9orldBC 4olfeIs =1 ! > &hose 'eeper( :3is boo; $ives many concrete examples of t3e penetration of t3e lo$ic of money/mar;ets and administrative po9er/bureaucracy into t3e arena of communicative action1 4e 9ill consider eac3 in turn1 The ar"et1 4olfe =1 ! C(1> be$ins 3is consideration of community and t3e mar;et by assertin$

t3at Bcommunity ties 111 are Auite different t3an mar;et ties1 :3e former are intimate, reciprocal, and sympat3etic, 93ile t3e latter tend to be impersonal, rational, temporary, and instrumental1B 43en t3e latter

ties come to dominate t3e former, community is t3reatened1 :3e 3armful conseAuences of t3e extension of mar;et lo$ic into everyday life 9as fores3ado9ed over four score years a$o by 4eber 93o sa9 economism as an Biron ca$e1B Similarly, C3arles Jindblom =1 !.> 3as called a pure mar;et society Ba prison1BSome of t3e problems of community 4olfe =1 ! C((> observes as a conseAuence of economic mar;ets are t3e Bsuspicion divorce, alienation, and distrustB 93ic3 develop in areas 93ic3 are BsubDect to unusually s3arp s9in$s in economic fortuneB =notably economic Bboomto9nsB and Bbustto9nsB>1 4olfe adds t3at rural communities are not immune from t3is intrusion of mar;et forces into everyday life1 B8s t3e effects of a real mar;et 3it 8merican a$riculture, t3e moral nature of rural life be$an to c3an$e1 :3e economic stress associated 9it3 farm depression caused personal stress in marria$es, as people blamed eac3 ot3er for t3e problems t3ey faced1B )urt3er, Bas 9as t3e case 9it3 economic boomto9ns, rural poverty increased 3omicide, suicide, and divorceB =4olfe 1 ! C((>1 Suc3 conditions are 93olly unsuitable for t3e maintenance or development of community1 :3e life9orld reAuires some insulation from mar;et forces in order to provide a stable environment in 93ic3 community can exist and flouris31 The State1 Jeft liberals and social democrats 3ave too infreAuently been 9ary of a bi$ state =e1$1, ?e3n, 1 !(>1 +ndeed, many 9it3 suc3 leftist impulses loo; not to t3e 8merican 9elfare state as an exemplar but to ScandinaviaIs more extensive and compre3ensive system of 9elfare provision1 8s 4olfe =1 ! C13.03> notes, BSuccess stories in t9entiet30century politics 3ave been all too fe9, but t3e Scandinavian 9elfare states certainly count amon$ t3em1 111 :3e problem is 93et3er t3is success comes at t3e cost of 9ea;enin$ social and moral ties in civil society, especially families and communities1 E:F3e 9elfare state can brin$ in its 9a;e an unanticipated problemC 93en $overnment assumes moral responsibility for ot3ers, people are less li;ely to do so t3emselves1B :3is is because Bt3e political lo$ic of t3e 9elfare state is vertical, emp3asi@in$ t3e relations bet9een individuals =or t3e $roups to 93ic3 t3ey belon$> and t3e stateG it is rarely 3ori@ontal, emp3asi@in$ t3e interrelations3ips bet9een individuals =or $roups> t3emselvesB =4olfe 1 ! C1!3>1 :3is verticali@ation0Aua0coloni@ation of life9orld relations 3as 3armful conseAuences for community1

10

Ji;e mar;et economics discussed above, t3e penetration of t3e state into everyday life 3as a corrosive effect on t3e activities and institutions of civil society1 &otably, t3e autonomous family is under attac; in Scandinavia to an extent unima$inable by many1 :3ere is an increasin$ reliance on $overnment to provide after sc3ool pro$rams and an extensive reliance on foster 3omes, institutions and ot3er state0 sponsored met3ods for copin$ 9it3 problem c3ildren1 =S9eden 3as been named t3e 3ome of t3e Bc3ild Gula$B> =4olfe 1 ! C13(0'>1 +t is not unrealistic to speculate t3at Scandinavian countriesI lo9 rates of family stability are in part due to t3e extensive transfer of familial obli$ations to t3e state1 43at is true for t3e family is also true for community more broadly understoodC extensive social pro$rams of t3e 9elfare state relieve individuals in t3e informal net9or;s of communities of t3e responsibility to care for one anot3er1 +t is our position t3at t3e flouris3in$ of community can only come 93en money and po9er do not 9ei$3 so 3eavily on social relations in t3e life9orld1 +t ta;es time and stability to develop t3e relations of trust, mutual obli$ation, love, and sacrifice 93ic3 6ansbrid$e and Sel@nic; identify as central to community1 :3is can only occur 9it3 any freAuency if civil society is insulated from mar;ets and t3e state1 4e believe t3at basic income $oes a lon$ 9ay to9ard suc3 insulation1

5vervie9C <asic +ncome 8s muc3 as t3e economy and t3e state 3ave coloni@ed t3e sp3ere of t3e life9orld, t3ey 3ave not accomplis3ed 93at t3ey set out to ac3ieve in doin$ so1 8ccordin$ to 4olfe =1 ! C.3'>, it 9as in t3e post0 4orld 4ar ++ years t3at B4estern liberal democracies developed a common solution for t3eir political and economic problems 93ic3 lin;ed $overnment and t3e mar;et to$et3er in111t3e Meynesian 9elfare state1B <ut, as 5ffe =1 .> and Standin$ =1 .> ma;e clear, t3e consensus surroundin$ t3is 9elfare state B3as

bro;en do9n as a political and economic compromise capable of containin$ t3e maDor conflicts in modern liberal democraciesB =4olfe 1 ! C.3'>1 +n fact, t3e current 9elfare system is seen to be suc3 a failure t3at it is roundly critici@ed for its inadeAuacy and/or ineffectiveness by all parties concerned, includin$ t3ose on

11

t3e Jeft =*abermas 1 '-G 5IConnor 1 '3G 5ffe 1 !,G )raser n1d1>, ?i$3t =)riedman and )riedman, 1 Center =4ilson 1 !'>, and amon$ &eoconservatives =Gla@er, 1 !!G Mristol, 1 '!G see Steinfels 1 ' >1 "espite t3e extensive criticism of t3e 9elfare state, 3o9ever, 9e are not attracted to any of t3e apparent alternatives1 EAually unpalatable c3oices are offered up in t3e debate bet9een t3e social democratic left00in its pursuit of lar$er role for t3e 9elfare state00and t3e neoconservative ri$3t00in its

0>,

efforts to reduce or eliminate t3e existin$ 9elfare state1 %ltimately, t3is polari@ation leaves us =as it does in t3e deadloc;ed debate bet9een liberalism and communitarianism> 9it3 a frustratin$ antinomyC Eit3er 9e c3oose more social en$ineerin$, more paternalism and levelin$, in s3ort, more statism, in t3e name of e$alitarianism and social ri$3ts, or 9e opt for t3e free mar;et and/or refurbis3in$ of aut3oritarian social and political forms of or$ani@ation and relinAuis3 t3e democratic, e$alitarian components of our political culture in order to bloc; furt3er bureaucrati@ation of everyday life1 =Co3en and 8rato 1 .C1,01-> 8s an alternative to t3ese t9o c3oices, European sc3olars and activists are considerin$ a form of universal, non0means0tested income for individuals1 :3is Bbasic incomeB is officially defined as Ban income unconditionally paid to all on an individual basis, 9it3out means test or 9or; reAuirementB =Nan PariDs, 1 .C3>1( 6ore specifically, t3is 9ould mean t3at individuals00not 3ouse3olds009ould receive t3e funds,

t3at every individual 9ould receive it re$ardless of any ot3er income t3ey mi$3t already be receivin$, and t3at t3ere 9ould be no reAuirement for t3e individual to be 9or;in$, to 3ave 9or;ed, to be loo;in$ for 9or; or to be 9illin$ to ta;e 9or;1 Every citi@en 9ould t3erefore receive an unconditional sum sufficient to live modestlyG any amount t3ey earned by 9or;in$ 9ould be taxed and t3en allo9ed to supplement t3eir basic income1 :3e funds for suc3 a lar$e0scale transfer 9ould be made possible by 3i$3er taxes and t3e reduction or elimination of ot3er forms of 9elfare benefits t3at duplicate 93at a basic income 9ould provide1 8mon$ t3e advanta$es of a basic income is its simplicity00everyone receives it automatically and 9it3out Aualification1 +t is t3erefore not only an efficient process to administer, but it also eliminates t3e sti$ma of 9elfare for t3ose 93o need it1 +n addition, t3e basic income sc3eme as it is typically envisioned

1.

3as no Bunemployment trapB =i1e1, individuals livin$ on a basic income are taxed at a rate of less t3an 100O on t3eir additional earnin$s> and t3us does not provide a disincentive for an individual to 9or;1 43ile basic income may address admirably t3ese faults in current 9elfare policy, 9e believe t3at it also 3as at least one ot3er, less obvious, benefit1 :3e effect 9e 9is3 to consider in t3is paper is t3at enacting a national basic income policy could actually foster the development and maintenance of communities1 :3e idea of a basic income 3as been defended on many $rounds, includin$ t3ose of efficiency, social Dustice =e1$1, eAuality and liberty>, and national political community/citi@ens3ip, but 9e 3ave yet to see a defense on t3e $rounds 9e set fort3 in t3is paper1 ' "espite its individualistic overtones,! 9e believe t3at a basic income 3as t3e uniAue potential to 3elp foster community in 9ays t3at may not, at first, seem obvious1 6oreover, it can do so in a 9ay t3at is consistent 9it3 our political p3ilosop3y as defined in t3is paper and t3at is also sensitive to t3e mec3anisms of modern society denoted by our accompanyin$ t3eory of society1 :3at is, it follo9s from our liberal communitarian perspective t3at a desirable 9elfare policy 9ould be one 93ic3 simultaneously fosters community and protects fundamental individual liberties1 Suc3 a policy 9ould miti$ate t3e encroac3in$ lo$ic of bot3 t3e economy and t3e state into t3e sp3ere of civil societyG it 9ould 3elp rebuff t3e mali$nant coloni@ation of t3e life9orld by alien modes of existence and t3ereby en3ance t3e development of native community1

8 Jiberal Communitarian "efense of <asic +ncomeC )osterin$ Jocal Community 6any political t3eorists 9it3 a communitarian bent, li;e 6ic3ael 4al@er, 3old t3at members3ip in t3e national political community is a social $ood =see also Jordan 1 ! >1 +n t3eir vie9, t3e principles underlyin$ t3e social or$ani@ation of Bnational political communitiesB are vital to t3eories of Dustice1 4al@er 3as adeAuately made t3is point in 3is consideration of members3ip in a political community1 ?eactin$ to t3e contractarian Bdistributive DusticeB t3eori@in$ exemplified by ?a9ls, 4al@er =1 !3C31> ma;es t3e stron$ claim t3at t3e idea of distributive Dustice

13

presupposes a bounded 9orld 9it3in 93ic3 distributions ta;e placeC a $roup of people committed to dividin$, exc3an$in$, and s3arin$ social $oods, first of all amon$ t3emselves1 :3at 9orld 111 is t3e political community1 Given t3e foundational importance of members3ip in t3e political community00and 3ence eli$ibility for inclusion in Dust distributions of ri$3ts and $oods004al@er =1 !3C31> furt3er =and, in our minds, correctly> ar$uesC B:3e primary $ood t3at 9e distribute to one anot3er is members3ip in some 3uman community1B 8s important as members3ip in t3e national political is, 9e are 3ere ar$uin$ for t3e revitali@ation of 93at 9e feel is t3e foundation of civil societyC local community1 Stren$t3enin$ t3is sp3ere, rat3er t3an t3e sp3ere of t3e state =or t3e economy> is our $oal1 <ecause of t3is, 9e a$ree 9it3 8ndre Gor@ t3at Bmembers3ip in t3e Ipolitical communityI is not of itself inte$rative1 +t means not3in$ more t3an citi@ens3ipB =1 .C1' >1 )or t3at deeper sense of solidarity, one must loo; to t3e Bmicrosocial bondsB

found in t3e local community1 <ut Gor@ $oes on to ar$ue t3at a basic income 9ould do not3in$ to stren$t3en t3e bonds typical of local community1 *e cites t3e inability of t3e 9elfare state to create Bcommon interests bet9een citi@ens,B and 3e sees a basic income as Dust anot3er 9elfare policy t3atC

in itself does not imply any communicative bond, voluntary co0operation, participation or s3arin$1 +t does not in any 9ay mean t3at people care for eac3 ot3er any more t3an t3ey did previously, simply t3at t3ey are bein$ ta;en care of more extensively by t3e state, to compensate for =a> t3e dislocation of microsocial bonds and =b> t3e brea;do9n of t3e Dob mar;et as an effective system of allocatin$ socially necessary labour and distributin$ socially produced 9ealt3B =pp1 1' 01!0>1 Gor@ 3as several important points to consider 3ere1 *e is correct in assertin$ t3at participation in t3e political community does not necessarily confer t3e advanta$es of social inte$ration t3at participation in a local community $enerates1 Ji;e Gor@, 9e also believe t3at it is t3e local community t3at reAuires stren$t3enin$1 <ut 9e must ta;e exception to t3e idea t3at t3e state can or s3ould some3o9 Bma;eB people participate 9it3 and care for eac3 ot3er1 8 liberal democratic state cannot force its citi@ens to participate in a communityG it 3as no et3ical mec3anism available to it for Bcollectivi@in$B individuals =<uc3anan

1,

1 ! C!(->1 +nstead, a commitment to liberal ideals reAuires t3at if t3e state, as a democratic instrument of t3e people, determines t3at community is a desirable $oal, t3en it may only promote or foster it t3rou$3 means t3at en3ance t3e ability of its citi@ens to ma;e t3at c3oice for t3emselves1 8nyt3in$ more 9ould fundamentally undermine t3e core of 93at it means to be a communityC a $eo$rap3ical collectivity 3eld to$et3er by s3ared understandin$s, a sense of mutual obli$ation, and self0determination =recall <ender 1 !.C'>1 6oreover, 9e a$ree 9it3 Gor@ t3at simply $rantin$ money to citi@ens does not, in itself, ma;e citi@ens more community oriented1 *o9ever, 9e do feel t3at Gor@ is missin$ a more simple and obvious 9ay in 93ic3 a basic income could foster and encoura$e t3e creation and maintenance of communities in 93ic3 t3e sense of inte$ration and cooperation 3e pri@es could flouris31 <riefly put, 9e believe t3at a basic income could facilitate and support locally or$ani@ed communities by reducin$ t3e undesirable effects of a national mar;et economy and t3e state on t3e community1 :3ese effects, includin$ a narro9 economic focus, excessive state intervention, forced residence, and forced mi$ration, are caustic a$ents to t3e or$anic bonds of solidarity t3at c3aracteri@e a community1 +n 93at follo9s, 9e 9ill ar$ue t3at a basic income 9ould miti$ate si$nificantly eac3 of t3ese effects1

)arrow *conomic +ocus +n order to survive, any community in a capitalist labor mar;et is forced to focus almost entirely on economic subsistence to t3e detriment of social and cultural solidarity1 :3at is, in t3e sense 9e 3ave been describin$ it, t3e economic sp3ere infiltrates and undermines t3e foundation of community located in t3e life9orld1 Communities as a 93ole become subDect to t3e 93im of lar$e companies t3at constitute t3e dominant industry in t3e area of t3e community =<luestone and *arrison 1 !.G &as3 1 ! >1 :3ere is an increasin$ monetari@ation of interpersonal relations and individuals be$in to see eac3 ot3er as eit3er income opportunities or economic competitorsG t3eir lives become more and more directed to9ard financial security, and 93at t3ey 3ave in common 9it3 eac3 ot3er is t3eir mountin$ anxiety in t3e face of an

1-

intimidatin$, unpredictable, and remorseless economy1 43en an individualIs life becomes cau$3t up in t3e involuted cycles and epicycles of re$ional, national, and international economic va$aries00transmitted 9it3 cold precision by bottom0line executives and bureaucrats, sine ire ac studio 00it is no 9onder t3at issues of community become Auaint distractions to t3e business of survival1 %nder suc3 conditions, t3e delicate bonds of communal solidarity are torn asunder li;e a spider 9eb in a 3urricane1 +nstitutin$ a nation9ide basic income 9ould insulate t3e life9orld from penetration by t3e media of t3e economic subsystem, allo9in$ people some of t3e economic and psyc3olo$ical space needed to develop and benefit from t3e 3ealt3y bases of communal institutions in civil society1 4it3 suc3 a $rant, members 9ould be able to focus on t3e real 9or; it ta;es to build an environment of inclusiveness, eAuality, s3ared understandin$, and a notion of t3e common $ood, t3us ma;in$ t3e community stron$er, more viable, and better able to 9eat3er t3e storms of an impersonal economy1 :3e 9ays in 93ic3 a basic income could foster t3ese social buildin$ bloc;s includes t3e follo9in$1 #nclusiveness1 8ll members of a community under a basic income 9ould 3ave t3e minimum reAuired financial resources to allo9 t3em to participate in a variety of activities t3at do not necessarily produce income, but still contribute to t3e community1 8ccordin$ to <loc; =1 0C.0,0!>, a basic income

9ould provide some measure of economic security and t3ereby increase discretionary time00encoura$in$ time spent volunteerin$, or$ani@in$ and participatin$ in t3e community, pursuin$ artistic interests, en$a$in$ in all sorts of leisure activities, or simply increasin$ t3e amount of time spent 9it3 oneIs family1 :3ese are Dust some of t3e activities t3at 3elp define a community and its et3os in 93ic3 members 9ould be more free to participate =recall 4olfeIs and *abermasIs litanies above>1 %ltimately, no one 9ould be excluded from any important aspect of t3e community because of financial constraints1 10 *,uality1 8lt3ou$3 it is obvious t3at a basic income 9ould not $uarantee complete eAuality, it 9ould reduce many of t3ose ineAualities based on income and 9ould t3erefore miti$ate class differences to some extent1 )urt3ermore, 9e reco$ni@e t3at a basic income 9ould not prevent directly t3ose ineAualities based on ot3er, non0economic, criteria =especially race and $ender>, but inasmuc3 as suc3 forms of

1(

ineAuality are in some 9ay lin;ed to income, t3eir effects 9ould li;ely be miti$ated1 +ndeed, many sc3olars00notably t3e B<er;eley Sc3oolB of race relations003ave ar$ued t3at economics are at t3e 3eart of race relations in 8merica =<lumer, 1 -!G <launer, 1 '.G 5mi and 4inant, 1 !(G Steinber$, 1 ! G :a;a;i, 1 !'G 4ellman 1 ''G also see 4ilson 1 '3 for a development of <launerIs 9or;>1 Similarly, )raser =n1d1> and 5;in =1 ! > bot3 point to t3e importance of an exit option for 9omen in oppressive relations3ipsG a basic income 9ould provide suc3 an option and t3erefore $ive 9omen t3e necessary economic foundation upon 93ic3 to $o about t3e reali@ation of t3eir basic liberties1 5;in =1 ! > includes suc3 support as a vital step in t3e elimination of $ender as a cate$ory 93ic3 in 8merican society 3as been synonymous 9it3 ineAuality1 Shared -nderstanding1 +n t3e same 9ay t3at it provides 9omen 9it3 an option to exit oppressive relations3ips, a basic income facilitates a 3umane =i1e1, economically neutral> exit from t3e community for t3ose 93o do not necessarily s3are its beliefs or $oals1 <ecause suc3 exits 9ould be based less on economics and more on t3e c3aracter of t3e community, t3ose individuals 93o remain in t3e community are muc3 more li;ely to be t3ose 93o parta;e in and are committed to t3ose s3ared understandin$s 3eld by t3e entire community1 =:o anticipate our ar$ument about mobility belo9, basic income may increase stability in a community and t3erefore facilitate t3e development of s3ared understandin$s1> A )otion of the Common .ood1 <ecause a basic income 9ould encoura$e t3e development of communities 9it3 a sense of s3ared understandin$, suc3 communities are muc3 more li;ely to cultivate some notion of t3e common $ood1 6oreover, because a basic income 9ould relax t3e communityIs c3ronic economic focus, it 9ould alleviate many of t3e conflicts, compromises, and inefficiencies t3at arise from financial difficulties1 8s a result, members of t3e community 9ould be freer to concentrate on and reac3 a consensus re$ardin$ a deeper notion of t3e common $ood1 :3us a basic income s3ould allo9 t3ose positive Aualities 9e associate 9it3 community to rise to t3e attention of its members1 :3is vie9 is in opposition to t3ose 93o ma;e t3e criticism t3at t3e 9elfare stateIs intervention in t3e community 9ea;ens it because it turns its members a9ay from reliance on eac3

1'

ot3er to9ard a reliance on t3e state =e1$1, t3e neoconservatives Steinfels E1 ' F scrutini@es>1 :3ese same critics mi$3t ar$ue t3at a basic income 9ould be an expansion of t3is intervention 9it3 correspondin$ly more detrimental effects1 Kuite t3e contrary, 9e believe t3at suc3 a $rant 9ould actually constitute a minimi%ation of t3e stateIs involvement in t3e community and 3ence 9ould miti$ate a$ainst t3e second maDor t3reat to community su$$ested aboveC t3e bureaucrati@ation of everyday life, or t3e penetration of t3e coordinatin$ lo$ic of administrative po9er into t3e life9orld1

State #ntervention :3ou$3 9e 3ave, follo9in$ 4olfe =1 ! >, pointed to t3e Scandinavian 9elfare states as paradi$matic of life9orld coloni@ation, t3e current 8merican 9elfare state also intrudes upon t3e community in multiple and differin$ 9ays1 +ts intervention is pervasive and t3e form it ta;es is, for t3e most part, beyond t3e control of t3e community to alter1 <ecause t3e state controls t3e particular form of 9elfare it offers to t3e members of a community, t3ose members 93o accept it must orient t3emselves to9ard t3e form it ta;es in a 9ay t3at fosters dependence on t3e state1 :3us t3e various state pro$rams =e1$1, 8)"C, food stamps, social security, 6edicare> reAuire obeisance to bureaucrats, and attention to paper9or;, to sc3eduled appointments, and to t3e reAuirements of eli$ibility1 +n myriad 9ays, t3e state determines precisely 93at form its citi@ensI dependence 9ill ta;e1 :3e end result of a process t3at is supposed to relieve burdens is t3at it is sti$mati@in$ and tyrannical1 8$ain, relations 93ic3 are more properly mediated by cultural0lin$uistic, intersubDective processes are instead mediated by administrative po9er1 %nder a basic income, members of a community 93o need assistance receive it, alon$ 9it3 everybody else, in a non0sti$mati@in$ manner t3at minimi@es t3e stateIs role in providin$ it1 ?at3er t3an an octopus of multiple0entry, in0;ind 9elfare provision t3at demands orientation to and dependency on intensive and extensive bureaucratic apparati, t3e state instead becomes an unobtrusive sin$le0event provider of a universal resource1 8s a result, t3e 9ays in 93ic3 t3e state can interfere 9it3 t3e internal

1!

functions of t3e life9orld, and 3ence a community, are reduced, its c3ief mode of intervention bein$ in t3e form of a cas3 $rant t3at leaves t3e details of its use up to t3e recipient1 :3is returns some of t3e responsibility for coordinatin$ social life to members of communitiesG it treats members as more fully capable of moral self0re$ulation t3an many statists 9ould allo9 =4olfe 1 ! C.1.03(>1 :3is really is a case of Bless is moreB in 93ic3 reducin$ t3e forms of state intervention allo9s t3e community more autonomy for its members and itself1 8dmittedly, a basic income is still a form of reliance on t3e state, but 9e believe suc3 reliance is not destructive to community for t3e follo9in$ reasons1 )irst, 9e all rely on t3e state in some form or anot3er1 43et3er it is a 3i$39ay or food inspection, nearly all of us depend on t3e state for numerous services 9e ta;e for $ranted1 8 basic income 9ould merely constitute anot3er service t3at could, in time, become similarly unobtrusive1 Second, because of t3e mercenary mar;et economy under 93ic3 9e live, some form of state assistance is necessary for t3e 9elfare of citi@ens1 4it3out it, communities are simply unable to ta;e care of t3eir o9n1 4e believe t3at a basic income constitutes a de0emp3asi@ed form of assistance t3at insulates people from t3e lo$ic of t3e mar;et and also allo9s t3e community, rat3er t3an t3e state, to remain preeminent in t3e lives of its members1 )inally, and most importantly, t3e real dama$e to communal ties comes 93en specific needs of its members are extracted from t3e community and met 93olly by t3e state1 %nder a basic income, t3e state is reduced to merely providin$ t3e means 93ereby members of t3e community can meet t3ose needs eit3er t3rou$3 traditional or novel community resources1

+orced /esidence &ot only does t3e mar;et economy force t3e community to focus on economic exi$encies 93ile t3e bureaucratic 9elfare state insinuates itself into t3e everyday life of t3e community =as 9e noted above>, t3ey also constrain t3e individual memberIs actions to t3e detriment of bot3 t3e community and t3emselves1 :3at is, individuals can be forced to remain in a community t3ey 9ould ot3er9ise exit =presumably to relocate to a preferred community> because of t3e cost of movin$1 Suc3 a cost can ta;e t3e form eit3er of

insufficient funds to leave a community or poor employment prospects at t3e destination community of c3oice1 8s a result, 3i$3 unemployment can actually lo9er mi$ration from a re$ion so t3at people become trapped in 3i$3 unemployment areas =Sandefur, :uma and Mep3art, 1 1>1 43ile stability is important to

t3e development of community, t3is stability must be unencumbered by dire economic necessity =e1$1, Joic 4acAuant and 4illiam Julius 4ilson E1 ! F 3ave s3o9n t3e pernicious affects on community institutions of t3e immobility resultin$ from t3e deindustriali@ation of inner city C3ica$o>1 Given t3at 9e are committed to a liberal democracy t3at supports t3e ri$3t of an individual to en$a$e in voluntary association, t3e communal environment 9e s3ould see; to foster is one in 93ic3 t3e costs of exitin$ a community do not pro3ibit an individual from exercisin$ 3is or 3er ri$3t of exit1 4it3 t3is in mind, a basic income could not 3elp but en3ance an individualIs ability to exit an association voluntarily1 <y effectively reducin$ t3e cost of exitin$ an inappropriate community, t3e individual is t3en more free to mi$rate to a community more amenable to t3eir c3aracter1 :3is, in turn, s3ould foster t3e existence of communities 93ose members are residents for le$itimate and committed reasons, suc3 as possessin$ a s3ared understandin$ or a notion of t3e common $ood, rat3er t3an for solely economic reasons =a$ain, t3e parallel to families in 5;in E1 ! F seems to apply>1

+orced

igration )inally, a basic income 9ould also reduce t3e forced $eo$rap3ic mobility of community members

t3at results from t3eir participation in a fluctuatin$ labor mar;et1 8s boomto9ns turn into $3ost to9ns and capital moves its facilities to t3e c3eapest locale of t3e moment =<luestone and *arrison, 1 !.G &as3, 1 ! >, 9or;ers0093o are simultaneously community members00are forced to move in response or endure poverty1 6asses of 9or;ers move from &ort3 to Sout3, East to 4est, state to state, and to9n to to9n in searc3 of Dobs1 +n fact, a lar$e part of all lon$ distance moves, ,- percent or almost 3alf, are motivated primarily by economic factors =Jic3ter and "eJon$, 1 0C,03>1 Suc3 mi$ration can slo9ly drain a

community of its members or devastate it 9it3 an exodus1 Conversely, economic serendipity can overload

.0

a community 9it3 3ordes of Dob0see;in$ stran$ers1 ?e$ardless of t3e exact details, mi$ration can play 3avoc 9it3 communities1

8 nei$3bor3ood or a community can be expected to absorb a certain rate of turnover of its members 9it3out $reat c3an$e in t3e social system1 <ut one can ima$ine a rate of turnover so rapid t3at t3e system 9ill be unable to continue performin$ t3e social functions1 =<erliner, 1 ''C,-.> )or t3e individual tossed about by crests and trou$3s of economic fortune, t3ere is most often an abrupt loss of t3e community t3at consisted of t3e ties to, and interaction 9it3, family, ;in $roups and friends =Jic3ter and "eJon$, 1 0C,0'G <erliner, 1 ''C,-,>1 6oreover, once t3e mi$rant reac3es 3is or 3er ne9

destination, t3ere remains a slo9 adDustment period of minimal social interaction t3at lasts up to five years before a sense of community is reestablis3ed =Jic3ter and "eJon$, 1 0C,0!>1

+f not3in$ else is clear, it is t3at a basic income 9ould most li;ely reduce t3e amount of forced mi$ration due to c3an$in$ economic conditions by ma;in$ it feasible for people to stay 93ere it is t3ey feel most at 3ome1 43en individuals are provided 9it3 a subsistence income t3en t3ey 9ill be able to afford to cater to t3eir desire for a stable and familiar community environment1 43ile t3ere may be an initial increase in mi$ration as some people =possibly freed from forced residence> find t3eir community of c3oice, t3ere s3ould be a si$nificant increase in t3ose individuals 93ose commitment to t3eir community, in combination 9it3 a basic income, allo9s t3em to settle do9n into stable communities ric3 9it3 meanin$ful relations3ips1 6oreover, 93en t3e population stops movin$ around at t3e 93im of corporate plannin$, per3aps companies 9ill find repeated relocation to be economically disadvanta$eous1 :3is, in turn, 9ould only furt3er insulate communities from t3e va$aries of mi$ration1

Conclusion +n conclusion, 9e believe t3at a national $uaranteed basic income 9ould serve to miti$ate t3e destructive effect of mar;et and state forces on existin$ and potential communities and t3ereby free t3em to

.1

prosper and flouris3 on t3e basis of ot3er facets of t3e communal relations3ip1 %nfettered by divisive and oppressive economic concerns and paternalistic and intrusive state intervention, communities 9ould t3en be free to build real social solidarity on t3e basis of s3ared understandin$s, common culture, a notion of t3e common $ood, and $enuine sentiment bet9een members1 :3e results could be dramaticC a basic income 9ould surely en3ance t3e survival of existin$ communities t3at mi$3t ot3er9ise fail1 <oomto9ns, inner city $3ettoes, and utopian communities, for example, 9ould suddenly $ain an existence independent of t3e economic and state forces t3at 3ave 3istorically limited t3eir lifespan1 Even more excitin$, a basic income could allo9 t3e development of ne9 communities t3at mi$3t ot3er9ise never 3ave seen t3e li$3t of day1 +n s3ort, a $uaranteed basic income 9ould foster a blossomin$ of communities by pus3in$ bac; t3e s3ado9 of an economy t3at stunts our conception of t3e common $ood and by eradicatin$ t3e spectre of a state t3at infiltrates t3e intimate domain of 3uman community1 +n closin$, 9e can do no more t3an 93ole 3eartedly assent to 4olfeIs =1 ! C.-!> conclusionC 43en local communities are protected a$ainst t3e full intrusion of t3e mar;et, $reater voluntary action and respect for ot3ers 9ill resultG 93en t3ey are protected a$ainst t3e full intrusion of t3e state, not every response to every social problem need be an institutional response111143en, in s3ort, civil society exists as a sp3ere alon$side t3e mar;et and t3e state, it contributes to t3e more effective 9or;in$ of bot3 of t3emG 93en t3e mar;et and t3e state exist 9it3out civil society, neit3er can 9or; as promised1

..

&5:ES

.3

?E)E?E&CES 8nderson, Perry1 1 '(1 B:3e 8ntinomies of 8ntonio Gramsci1B &e9 Jeft ?evie9 100C-0'!1 <ec;er, Gary1 1 !11 8 :reatise on t3e )amily1 Cambrid$e, 68C *arvard %niversity Press1 777771 1 '(1 :3e Economic 8pproac3 to *uman <e3avior1 C3ica$oC %niversity of C3ica$o Press1 <ella3, ?obert, ?ic3ard 6adsen, 4illiam Sullivan, 8nn S9idler, and Steve :ipton1 1 Society1 &e9 #or;C Mnopf1 11 :3e Good

<ender, :3omas1 1 !.1 Community and Social C3an$e in 8merica1 <altimore, 6"C Jo3ns *op;ins Press1 <e3nabib, Seyla1 1 .1 B8utonomy, 6odernity, and CommunityC Communitarianism and Critical Social :3eory in "ialo$ue1B Pp1 3 0- in 8xel *onnet3, :3omas 6cCart3y, Claus 5ffe, and 8lbrec3t 4ellmer, eds1 Cultural0Political +nterventions in t3e %nfinis3ed ProDect of En$li$3tenment1 Cambrid$e, 68C 6+: Press1 <erliner, Josep3 S1 1 ''1 B+nternal 6i$rationC 8 Comparative "isciplinary Nie9B in <ro9n, 8lan 81 and E$on &euber$er =eds1>1 +nternal 6i$rationC 8 Comparative Perspective1 &e9 #or;C 8cademic Press1 <launer, ?obert1 1 '.1 ?acial 5ppression in 8merica1 &e9 #or;C *arper P ?o91 <loc;, )red1 1 01 Postindustrial PossibilitiesC 8 CritiAue of Economic "iscourse1 <er;eleyC %niversity of California Press1 <luestone, <arry, and <ennett *arrison1 1 !.1 :3e "eindustriali@ation of 8merica1 &e9 #or;C <asic <oo;s1 <lumer, *erbert1 1 -!1 B?ace PreDudice as a Sense of Group Position1B Pacific Sociolo$ical ?evie9 1C30'1 <uc3anan, 8llen1 1 ! 1 B8ssessin$ t3e Communitarian CritiAue of Jiberalism1B Et3ics Co3en, Jean, and 8ndre9 8rato1 1 C!-.0!.1

.a1 Civil Society and Political :3eory1 Cambrid$e, 68C 6+: Press1

777771 1 .b1 BPolitics and t3e ?econstruction of t3e Concept of Civil Society1B Pp1 1.10,. in 8xel *onnet3, :3omas 6cCart3y, Claus 5ffe, and 8lbrec3t 4ellmer, eds1 Cultural0Political +nterventions in t3e %nfinis3ed ProDect of Enli$3tenment1 Cambrid$e, 68C 6+: Press1 Coleman, James1 1 31 B:3e ?ational ?econstruction of Society1B 8merican Sociolo$ical ?evie9 -!C101-1

Epsin$08nderson, Gosta1 1 !-1 Politics 8$ainst 6ar;etsC :3e Social "emocratic ?oad to Po9er1 Princeton, &JC Princeton %niversity Press1 )o9ler, ?obert <oot31 1 11 :3e "ance 9it3 CommunityC :3e Contemporary "ebate in 8merican Political :3ou$3t1 Ja9rence, MSC %niversity of Mansas Press1 )ox0Genovese, Eli@abet31 1 11 )eminism 4it3out +llusionsC 8 CritiAue of +ndividualism1 C3apel *illC %niversity of &ort3 Carolina Press1

.,

)raser, &ancy1 n1d1 B8fter t3e )amily 4a$eC 43at "o 4omen 4ant in Social 4elfareHB %npublis3ed manuscript1 )riedman, 6ilton, and ?ose )riedman1 1 <race Jovanovic31 01 )ree to C3ooseC 8 Personal Statement1 San "ie$oC *arcourt

)reeden, 6ic3ael1 1 .1 BJiberal Communitarianism and <asic +ncome1B Pp1 1!-0 1 in P3ilippe Nan PariDs, ed1 8r$uin$ for <asic +ncomeC Et3ical )oundations of a ?adical ?eform1 JondonC Nerso1 Giddens, 8nt3ony1 1 !'1 Social :3eory and 6odern Sociolo$y1 StanfordC Stanford %niversity Press1 777771 1 '(1 &e9 ?ules of Sociolo$ical 6et3odC 8 Positive CritiAue of +nterpretive Sociolo$ies1 &e9 #or;C <asic <oo;s1 Gla@er, &at3an1 1 !!1 :3e Jimits of Social Policy1 Cambrid$e, 68C *arvard %niversity Press1 Gor@, 8ndre1 1 .1 B5n t3e "ifference <et9een Society and Community, and 43y <asic +ncome Cannot by +tself Confer )ull 6embers3ip of Eit3er1B Pp1 1'!0!, in P3ilippe Nan PariDs, ed1 8r$uin$ for <asic +ncomeC Et3ical )oundations for a ?adical ?eform1 JondonC Nerso1 Gusfield, Josep31 1 '-1 CommunityC 8 Critical ?esponse1 &e9 #or;C *arper Colop3on1 Gutmann, 8my1 1 !-1 BCommunitarian Critics of Jiberalism1B P3ilosop3y and Public 8ffairs 1,C30!03..1 *abermas, Jur$en1 1 .1 B)urt3er ?eflections on t3e Public Sp3ere1B Pp1 ,.10(1 in Crai$ Cal3oun, ed1 *abermas and t3e Public Sp3ere1 Cambrid$e, 68C 6+: Press1 777771 1 ! 1 :3e Structural :ransformation of t3e Public Sp3ereC 8n +nAuiry +nto a Cate$ory of <our$eois Society1 Cambrid$e, 68C 6+: Press1 777771 1 !'1 :3e :3eory of Communicative 8ction, Nol1 ., Jife9orld and SystemC 8 CritiAue of )unctionalist ?eason1 :rans1 :3omas 6cCart3y1 <ostonC <eacon Press1 777771 1 '-1 Je$itimation Crisis1 :rans1 :3omas 6cCart3y1 <ostonC <eacon Press1 *olmes, Step3en1 1 31 :3e 8natomy of 8ntiliberalism1 Cambrid$e, 68C *arvard %niversity Press1

Jordan, <ill1 1 .1 B<asic +ncome and t3e Common Good1B Pp1 1--0'' in P3ilippe Nan PariDs, ed1 8r$uin$ for <asic +ncomeC Et3ical )oundations for a ?adical ?eform1 JondonC Nerso1 777771 1 ! 1 :3e Common GoodC Citi@ens3ip, 6orality, and Self0+nterest1 5xfordC <lac;9ell1 Mristol, +rvin$1 1 '!1 :9o C3eers for Capitalism1 &e9 #or;C <asic <oo;s1 Mymlic;a, 4ill1 1 ! 1 Jiberalism, Community and Culture1 5xfordC Clarendon Press1 Jic3ter, "aniel :1 and Gordon )1 "eJon$1 1 01 B:3e %nited States,B in &am, C3arles <1, 4illiam J1 Sero9, and "avid )1 Sly =eds1>1 +nternational *andboo; on +nternal 6i$ration1 &e9 #or;C Green9ood

.-

Press1 Jindblom, C3arles1 1 !!1 Politics and 6ar;etsC :3e 4orldIs Political Economic Systems1 &e9 #or;C <asic <oo;s1 777771 1 !.1 B:3e 6ar;et as Prison1B Journal of Politics ,,C3.,03(1 Jomas;y, Joren1 1 !'1 Persons, ?i$3ts and t3e 6oral Community1 &e9 #or;C 5xford %niversity Press1 6ac+ntyre, 8lisdair1 1 !,1 8fter Nirtue1 .nd edition1 &otre "ame, +&C %niversity of &otre "ame Press1 6ansbrid$e, Jane1 1 31 B)eminism and "emocratic Community1B Pp1 33 0 - in Jo3n C3apman and +an S3apiro, eds1 &565S 3-1 "emocratic Community1 &e9 #or;C &e9 #or; %niversity Press1 6ouffe, C3antal1 1 31 B8merican Jiberalism and its Communitarian Critics1B Pp1 .30,0 in :3e ?eturn of t3e Political1 JondonC Nerso1 6ul3all, Step3en, and 8dam S9ift1 1 .1 Jiberals and Communitarians1 5xfordC <lac;9ell Publis3ers1

&as3, June1 1 ! 1 )rom :an; :o9n to *i$3 :ec3C :3e Clas3 of Community and +ndustrial Cycles1 &e9 #or;C S%&# Press1 &o@ic;, ?obert1 1 ',1 8narc3y, State and %topia1 &e9 #or;C <asic <oo;s1 5IConnor, James1 1 '31 :3e )iscal Crisis of t3e State1 &e9 #or;C St1 6artins1 5ffe, Claus1 1 .1 B8 &on0productivist "esi$n for Social Policies1B Pp1 (10'! in P3ilippe Nan PariDs, ed1 8r$uin$ for <asic +ncomeC Et3ical )oundations of a ?adical ?eform1 JondonC Nerso1 777771 1 !,1 Contradictions of t3e 4elfare State1 Cambrid$e, 68C 6+: Press1 5;in, Susan 6oller1 1 ! 1 Justice, Gender, and t3e )amily1 &e9 #or;C <asic <oo;s1 5mi, 6ic3ael, and *o9ard 4inant1 1 !(1 ?acial )ormation in t3e %nited StatesC )rom t3e 1 (0s to t3e 1 !0s1 &e9 #or;C ?outled$e1 Polanyi, Marl1 1 ,,1 :3e Great :ransformation1 <ostonC <eacon Press1 ?a9ls, Jo3n1 1 '11 8 :3eory of Justice1 Cambrid$e, 68C *arvard %niversity Press1 ?e3n, Gosta1 1 !(1 B:3e 4a$es of Success1B Pp1 1,30'- in Step3en Graubard, ed1 &ordenC :3e Passion for EAuality1 5sloC &or9e$ian %niversity Press1 Sandefur, Gary, &ancy :uma, and Geor$e Mep3art1 1 11 ?ace, Jocal Jabor 6ar;ets, and 6i$ration in t3e %nited States, 1 '-01 !31 6adison, 4+C +nstitute for ?esearc3 on Poverty1 Sandel, 6ic3ael1 1 !,1 B:3e Procedural ?epublic and t3e %nencumbered Self1B Political :3eory 1.C!10 (1 777771 1 !.1 Jiberalism and t3e Jimits of Justice1 Cambrid$eC Cambrid$e %niversity Press1

.(

Sel@nic;, P3ilip1 1 .1 :3e 6oral Common9ealt3C Social :3eory and t3e Promise of Community1 <er;eleyC %niversity of California Press1 Smit3, 8dam1 E1''(F 1 ((1 8n +nAuiry +nto t3e &ature and Causes of t3e 4ealt3 of &ations1 &e9 #or;C 81 61 Melley1 Standin$, Guy1 1 .1 B:3e &eed for a &e9 Social Consensus1B Pp1 ,'0(0 in P3ilippe Nan PariDs, ed1 8r$uin$ for <asic +ncomeC Et3ical )oundations for a ?adical ?eform1 JondonC Nerso1 Steinber$, Step3en1 1 ! 1 :3e Et3nic 6yt3C ?ace, Et3nicity, and Class in 8merica, .nd edition1 <ostonC <eacon Press1 Steinfels, Peter1 1 ' 1 :3e &eoconservativesC :3e 6en 43o are C3an$in$ 8mericaIs Politics1 &e9 #or;C :ouc3stone1 :a;a;i, ?onald1 1 !'1 B+ntroductionB to ?onald :a;a;i, ed1 )rom "ifferent S3oresC Perspectives on ?ace and Et3nicity in 8merica1 &e9 #or;C 5xford %niversity Press1 :aylor, C3arles1 1 ! 1 BCross0PurposesC :3e Jiberal0Communitarian "ebate1B Pp1 1- 0!. in &ancy ?osenblum, ed1 Jiberalism and t3e 6oral Jife1 Cambrid$e, 68C *arvard %niversity Press1 Nan PariDs, P3ilippe1 1 Nerso1 .1 8r$uin$ for <asic +ncomeC Et3ical )oundations for a ?adical ?eform1 JondonC

4acAuant, Joic J1"1, and 4illiam Julius 4ilson1 1 ! 1 B:3e Cost of ?acial and Class Exclusion in t3e +nner0City1B :3e 8nnals of t3e 8merican 8cademy of Political and Social Science -01C!0.-1 4alter, :ony1 1 ! 1 <asic +ncomeC )reedom from Poverty, )reedom to 4or;1 JondonC 6arion <oyars1 4al@er, 6ic3ael1 1 01 B:3e Communitarian CritiAue of Jiberalism1B Political :3eory 1!C(0.31

777771 1 !31 Sp3eres of JusticeC 8 "efense of Pluralism and EAuality1 &e9 #or;C <asic <oo;s1 4ellman, "avid1 1 ''1 Portraits of 43ite ?acism1 Cambrid$eC Cambrid$e %niversity Press1 4ilson, 4illiam Julius1 1 !'1 :3e :ruly "isadvanta$edC :3e +nner City, t3e %nderclass, and Public Policy1 C3ica$oC %niversity of C3ica$o Press1 777771 1 '31 Po9er, ?acism, and Privile$eC ?ace ?elations in :3eoretical and Socio3istorical Perspectives1 &e9 #or;C )ree Press1 4olfe, 8lan1 1 ! 1 43ose MeeperH Social Science and 6oral 5bli$ation1 <er;eleyC %niversity of California Press1 #ac;, <ernard1 1 31 :3e Problems of a Political 8nimalC Community, Justice, and Conflict in 8ristotelian Political :3ou$3t1 <er;eleyC %niversity of California Press1

.'

11

:3e idea of a liberal communitarianism or a communitarian liberalism is not novel =see, e1$1, Jordan, 1 .G Sel@nic; 1 .>1 +ndeed, accordin$ to Seyla <en3abib =1 .C- >, t3e contemporary liberal0

.G

)reeden, 1

communitarian debate seems to be movin$ into a Bsecond p3aseB in 93ic3 some of t3e maDor players 3ave be$un to call into Auestion some of Bt3e 3ard oppositions bet9een individualism and community1B ?epresentative of t3e more friendly sparrin$ of t3is t3ird p3ase are 4ill Mymlic;a =1 ! > 93o 3as 9ei$3ed in for t3e liberal side, C3arles :aylor =1 ! > for t3e communitarians, and 6ic3ael 4al@er =1 0> for t3e BsoftB communitarians =t3ou$3

per3aps 4al@er 3as been a liberal communitarian all alon$, as in Spheres of Justice E1 !3F>1

.1

%nless ot3er9ise noted, t3is and all future pa$e references are to <uc3anan =1 ! >1

31

+n Co3en and 8ratoIs =1

.aC.,> terms, Bappeals to family, tradition, reli$ion, or community could foster t3e

destructive fundamentalism of false communities so easily manipulated from above, unless t3e ac3ievements of liberalism =t3e principle of ri$3ts> 111 are first defended1B

,1

%nless ot3er9ise noted, furt3er pa$e citations are to Co3en and 8rato =1 .b>1

.a>1 )or an excellent .0 pa$e

summary of t3eir '00 pa$e boo;, see Co3en and 8rato =1

-1

:3ese fears and 9arnin$s not9it3standin$, t3ere 3as been some effort to furt3er extend t3e reac3 of t3e mar;et

outside t3e economic subsystem, most notably by economists of t3e C3ica$o Sc3ool =<ec;er, 1 '(, 1 !1G )riedman and )riedman, 1 0>1 +ndeed, James Coleman =1 3> 3as recently proposed t3at institutions of civil

society be reor$ani@ed on t3e basis of t3e principle of individual utility maximi@ationG e1$1, by puttin$ a BbountyB on t3e 3ead of every c3ild in order to encoura$e parents to ta;e an interest in t3e development of 3uman capital in yout31 &ote t3at ColemanIs example constitutes a double coloni@ation of t3e life9orld as it involves t3e state usin$ mar;et mec3anisms to coordinate be3avior in civil society1

(1

Nan PariDs notes t3at t3is is t3e definition adopted by t3e <asic +ncome European &et9or;, an advocacy $roup

studyin$ t3e possibility of implementin$ a basic income in Europe1

'1

)or an overvie9 on t3e various forms of Dustification t3at are made for a basic income, see t3e debate in Theory

and Society =Nol 1-, &o1 -> and t3e excellent collection of essays edited by P3ilippe Nan PariDs =1 .>1

!1

:ony 4alter c3aracteri@es a basic income as Bradically individualisticB because of t9o results of its

implementationC Ba> by not bein$ conditional on $ender, marital status or paid employment, it Ea basic incomeF enlar$es t3e individualIs sp3ere of freedomG b> sin$le individuals rat3er t3an 3ouse3olds become t3e unit of entitlement and taxationB =1 ! C13!0 >1

<uc3anan =1 ! C!-!> ar$ues t3at Bit is a matter of 3istorical record t3at totalitarian re$imes 3ave employed t3e

most rut3less measures to undermine traditional communities 111 in t3e name of ac3ievin$ an all0inclusive EnationalF political community1B :3is, of course, says not3in$ about relations bet9een t3e development of national political communities and traditional communities in non0totalitarian re$imes, and 9e are not convinced t3at in a democratic society one cannot develop 9it3out 3armin$ t3e ot3er1

101

:3is ar$ument00t3e need for community participation and t3e ability of a basic income $rant to meet it00is

fundamentally t3e same one t3at <ill Jordan =1 .> ma;es, alt3ou$3 3is focus is on stren$t3enin$ t3e political, rat3er t3an t3e local, community1