Laski s views on the role of the State are very much influenced by his analysis of capitalist economy and its adverse effects on the poor and working class. He points out that, ‘…a dominant economic class uses the State to make ultimate those legal imperatives which best protect its interests.59 His rejection of the capitalist economy is based on his understating of undemocratic control of industry (no say of workers in running of the industry). He advocated industrial federalism and intervention of the state, as a central agency, in the economic field to control industrial power in the interests of the citizens. Laski is also concerned for securing equality in the socio-economic field, which is important for the development and realization of the all.
The State is not any adverse agency but a means to realize social good. He advocates welfare functions to be performed by the State. Laski, in his State in Theory and Practice, observes that a state is already performing a variety of functions. He says, ‘[t]here is hardly a function of social welfare undertaken by governments today which is not an effort to provide the poor with some, at least of the amenities that the rich are able to provide for themselves.’60 He goes on to count them as health, education, housing, social insurance, the regulation of hours of work, and wages in industry, the control of factory conditions, the provision of meals for poor school children, etc. The social welfare functions that the State undertakes is required to support the people who are dependent or exploited. This view of Laski on the social welfare functions of the State is in the realm of positive role of the state. His position on the role and functions of the State is within liberal framework, as he does not advocate either a supreme state or its withering away.
However, his liberal position is based on pluralist arguments. Though he gives primacy to the State in many cases, he treats it as one of the associations. As a logical result, Laski argues that the State should also justify its authority. This justification must be related to service rendered and satisfaction of demands of individuals by the State. In his An Introduction to Politics, Laski says, ‘the authority of a state is a function of its ability to satisfy the effective demands that are made upon it.’61 It means, if the State is able to meet varied demands of the individuals effectively—security of persons and property, religious liberty, etc., its authority is more legitimate. As such, Laski based obligation of the individual to the State on the service and satisfaction that the State renders to the individual.
Laski feels that the State in essence is nothing but the government comprised of ‘fallible men’. The State cannot and should not claim primacy, as this would amount to supremacy of the fallible men. In his State in Theory and Practice, Laski says, ‘the claim of the State to obedience … rests upon its will and ability to secure to its citizens the maximum satisfaction of their wants.’62 For Laski, the State is capable of meeting demands and as such is provider and reconciler of demands. Two conclusions follow: one that Laski argues for a limited state/government, and the second that political obligation of the individual to the State is based on the state’s capability to meet demands and provide services.
On the one hand, Laski championed individual liberty and limited government for an individual’s self-development, on the other, he argued for a regulated and welfare state. He advocated a series of welfare functions that the State should take up. These include general functions of law and order; social and welfare functions such as education, health, insurance against unemployment; and economic functions such as control of industry and betterment of working conditions of the poor, equity oriented taxation system, etc. By advocating positive liberty, social welfarist state and intervention of the State in economic field, Laski supported the cause of positive liberalism in the twentieth century. We can say that Laski’s state is a combination of cautious liberalism and moderated socialism.
Leave a Reply