ideology of division

Even before the 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, the rhetoric of “welfare reform” debate blamed recipients for their poverty while diverting attention from structural problems of our society. Proponents of “reform” argued that by withholding welfare benefits, gov...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published:
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/2047/d20002070
id ndltd-NEU--neu-332941
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-NEU--neu-3329412016-04-25T16:15:10Zideology of divisionEven before the 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, the rhetoric of “welfare reform” debate blamed recipients for their poverty while diverting attention from structural problems of our society. Proponents of “reform” argued that by withholding welfare benefits, government could change recipients’ behavior, transform present recipients into “productive members” of society, and solve the intractable problems of poverty. This article analyzes two of the most popular behavior-modification models, Learnfare and Family Cap, and contends that these “reform” efforts were driven by a New Right agenda, an “ideology of division” that manipulated public opinion by highlighting racial and gender biases.http://hdl.handle.net/2047/d20002070
collection NDLTD
sources NDLTD
description Even before the 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, the rhetoric of “welfare reform” debate blamed recipients for their poverty while diverting attention from structural problems of our society. Proponents of “reform” argued that by withholding welfare benefits, government could change recipients’ behavior, transform present recipients into “productive members” of society, and solve the intractable problems of poverty. This article analyzes two of the most popular behavior-modification models, Learnfare and Family Cap, and contends that these “reform” efforts were driven by a New Right agenda, an “ideology of division” that manipulated public opinion by highlighting racial and gender biases.
title ideology of division
spellingShingle ideology of division
title_short ideology of division
title_full ideology of division
title_fullStr ideology of division
title_full_unstemmed ideology of division
title_sort ideology of division
publishDate
url http://hdl.handle.net/2047/d20002070
_version_ 1718235898595770368