具体描述
If government tells dependent people how to live today, will we have a more self-reliant society tomorrow? That's the critical question as government increasingly seeks to supervise the lives of poor citizens who are dependent on it, often in return for supporting them. This trend is most visible in welfare policy, where " welfare reform" largely means attempts to require adults receiving assistance to work or stay in school in return for aid. However, it can also be seen in policy toward the homeless, where shelters increasingly set rules for their residents; in education, where states have instituted tougher standards for children; and in drug programs that test addicts for compliance. The drift in antipoverty policy is toward paternalism--the close supervision of the dependent. Paternalism has been a major trend in social policy for the past decade, and it has support from the public. But it has received little attention from researchers and policy analysts--until now. The New Paternalism opens up a serious discussion of supervisory methods in antipoverty policy. The book assembles noted policy experts to examine whether programs that set standards for their clients and supervise them closely are better able to help them than traditional programs that leave clients free to live as they please. Separate chapters discuss programs to promote work in welfare, prevent teen pregnancy, improve fathers' payment of child support, shelter homeless men in New York City, deter drug addiction, and improve the education of the disadvantaged. Cross-cutting chapters address the management of paternalism, the psychological needs of poor adults, and the tension between paternalism andAmerican politics. The authors consider both sides of the debate over this controversial issue. Several chapters address the sensitive question of whether government or private organizations are best able to implement supervisory programs. The conclusions are optimistic but cautious. Most of the authors believe that paternalism can make an important contribution to overcoming poverty. But paternalism is not a panacea, and it makes severe demands on the capacities of government. Supervisory programs are difficult to justify politically and to implement well.
作者简介
目录信息
读后感
用户评价
这本书的文风，坦白说，带有一种冷峻的知识分子气质，但绝非枯燥的学术说教。作者的遣词造句精准而富有张力，即便是处理那些抽象的概念，也能用极具画面感的语言来描绘其社会后果。我印象最深的是它对“预防性”思维的批判，那种企图在任何潜在风险发生之前就进行全面干预的倾向，是如何扼杀了创新和风险精神。它不是简单地喊“自由万岁”，而是细致地剖析了当代人是如何主动或被动地将自己的判断权外包出去，以换取一种虚幻的安全感。这种洞察力使得本书超越了单纯的社会评论，更像是一部关于现代人自我驯化的深度剖析。对于那些习惯于接受主流叙事的人来说，这本书可能会带来一次相当不舒服但绝对必要的智识冲击。
我是一个对历史和制度变迁特别敏感的读者，这本书在梳理现代社会权力演变脉络时，展现出的那种跨学科的视野令人印象深刻。它巧妙地将法学、伦理学甚至是早期人类学中的一些观察点熔于一炉，构建了一个极具说服力的历史连续性论述。我注意到作者在论述过程中，对“例外状态”与“常态治理”的边界模糊化处理，是全书的点睛之笔。它揭示了现代治理体系中，如何通过将某些群体或行为定义为“需要特别干预”的对象，从而为更广泛的权力扩张打开了缺口。这本书的论证结构非常严谨，但它拒绝给人一种“标准答案”的错觉，而是更像一份邀请函，邀请读者参与到对“谁有资格决定什么对谁好”这个终极问题的持续辩论中去。读完后，我感觉对周围世界的那层“温情脉脉的面纱”被揭开了，露出了底下精密的权力运作机制。
这本书的立意实在太新颖了，初读时甚至有些让人摸不着头脑，但随着深入，我发现作者的思辨角度极其刁钻，直指当前社会结构中那些被我们视为理所当然的“保护机制”的内在矛盾。它不像传统社会学著作那样堆砌宏大的理论框架，而是通过一系列看似微小、实则触及核心的案例分析，层层剥开现代父权制（或者说，某种“监护”姿态）是如何在看似进步的旗帜下，重新构建起一种更加隐蔽、更难被挑战的控制模式。我尤其欣赏作者对“善意”的解构——那些打着“为你好”的口号推行的政策或观念，往往最有效地消弭了个体的自主选择权。这种深入骨髓的批判力，让我在阅读过程中不断停下来反思自己日常生活中的诸多妥协与顺从。文字的节奏感很强，作者擅长用排比和反问来增强论证的冲击力，读起来酣畅淋漓，仿佛被作者拉着一起走过一条布满陷阱的哲学迷宫，每一步都需要谨慎判断。
从纯粹的阅读体验角度来看，这本书的叙事逻辑非常清晰，如同精密的手术刀，一层一层切开复杂的社会现象。我喜欢作者在引用外部文献时所表现出的那种审慎态度，他并不盲目崇拜任何单一的思想流派，而是像一个高明的炼金术士，将不同来源的智慧融合提炼，最终形成自己独到的见解。这本书的深刻之处在于，它迫使你重新审视那些我们习以为常的“保护性法律”或“道德准则”背后的初始动机以及它们在实践中产生的异化效果。它没有提供轻松的解决方案，反而提出了更多需要我们深思的困境。这种不提供廉价安慰的态度，正是我推崇严肃阅读的原因所在。它挑战了读者的智力阈限，要求你付出相应的认知努力。
这本书最让我感到震撼的地方，是它对“进步”这一概念的颠覆性解读。作者没有把社会发展视为一条单向度、必然向好的线性轨道，而是揭示了每一次自诩为“文明”的飞跃，往往伴随着某种同等规模的、对个体能动性的隐性阉割。它成功地描绘出一种“温柔的压迫”，这种压迫不再依赖于高压的暴力手段，而是通过优化信息流、精细化管理预期，让人心甘情愿地待在被设定的轨道上。这种对“温和控制”的描摹，其穿透力远超那些直接控诉压迫的文本。它不是一本让你读完后感到愤怒的书，而是一本让你读完后感到深思，并对周围世界的“善意”产生永久性怀疑的书。它是一份对当代社会契约的无情审阅报告。
