Family Values: Between Neoliberalism and the New Social Conservatism (Zone / Near Futures)

An investigation of the roots of the alliance between free-market neoliberals and social conservatives. Why was the discourse of family values so pivotal to the conservative and free-market revolution of the 1980s and why has it continued to exert such a profound influence on American political life? Why have free-market neoliberals so often made common cause with social conservatives on the question of family, despite their differences on all other issues? In this book, Melinda Cooper challenges the idea that neoliberalism privileges atomized individualism over familial solidarities, and contractual freedom over inherited status. Delving into the history of the American poor laws, she shows how the liberal ethos of personal responsibility was always undergirded by a wider imperative of family responsibility and how this investment in kinship obligations is recurrently facilitated the working relationship between free-market liberals and social conservatives. Neoliberalism, she argues, must be understood as an effort to revive and extend the poor law tradition in the contemporary idiom of household debt. As neoliberal policymakers imposed cuts to health, education, and welfare budgets, they simultaneously identified the family as a wholesale alternative to the twentieth-century welfare state. And as the responsibility for deficit spending shifted from the state to the household, the private debt obligations of family were defined as foundational to socioeconomic order. Despite their differences, neoliberals and social conservatives were in agreement that the bonds of family needed to be encouraged—and at the limit enforced—as a necessary counterpart to market freedom. In a series of case studies ranging from Bill Clinton's welfare reform to the AIDS epidemic and from same-sex marriage to the student loan crisis, Cooper explores the key policy contributions made by neoliberal economists and legal theorists. Only by restoring the question of family to its central place in the neoliberal project, she argues, can we make sense of the defining political alliance of our times, that between free-market economics and social conservatism. Contents 6 1. Between Neoliberalism and the New Social Conservatism 8 2. The Moral Crisis of Inflation: Neoliberalism, Neoconservatism, and the Demise of the Family Wage 26 AFDC, Welfare, and the American Family Wage 34 Moynihan, the Left, and the Black Family Wage 38 Nixon and the Black Family Wage: Exorcising AFDC 43 Turning Against the Family Wage: Neoliberalism and Neoconservatism Come into Their Own 47 The Rise of Neoconservatism: Inflation, Welfare, and Moral Crisis 50 Neoconservatism and Neoliberalism 57 Transitions 64 3. The Ethic of Family Responsibility: Reinventing the Poor Laws 68 Family Responsibility and the Elizabethan Poor Law 74 Promoting the African American Family: Reinventing the Poor Law After Emancipation 79 The Gilded Age: Family Responsibility and the Free Market 83 Family Crisis in the Gilded Age 88 From Private Family Responsibility to Public Responsibility for the Family 90 Reagan in California: Reviving Family Responsibility Laws 99 Federalizing Governor Reagan’s Welfare Reforms 102 Clinton’s Welfare Reform: Between Neoliberalism and the New Social Conservatism 108 The New Democrats: Between Neoliberalism and Communitarianism 110 Relegitimating Family Law 115 4. The Return of Inherited Wealth: Asset Inflation and the Economic Family 120 Class, Inflation, and the Erosion of Inherited Wealth 126 Financialization: Asset Price Inflation and the Return of Inherited Wealth 133 Clinton, Home Ownership, and the “democratization of Credit” 141 Home Ownership, Normativity, and the New Deal 144 Democratizing Credit: Beyond the Norm 150 Minorities Against the Estate Tax: Democratizing the Taxpayer Revolt 155 Gay Marriage and the Estate Tax 159 5. The Price of Promiscuity: The Chicago School Confronts Aids 168 Neoliberalism Against Social Insurance 176 Deinstitutionalization: How Neoliberalism Assimilated the New Left 181 The Politics of Selfcare: Aids in the Reagan Era 189 Family, Church, and Charity 194 Aids and the Uninsured Risk 201 Samesex Marriage and the Ethic of Family Responsibility 210 6. Human Capital, Student Debt, and the Logic of Family Investment 216 Vicissitudes of Human Capital Theory 220 The Student Movement: Protesting Human Capital and 228 Reagan and the Berkeley Student Protests 233 Democratizing Credit: Restoring Family Responsibility 240 Redux 252 7. Theology of the Social: the Rise of Faithbased Welfare 260 The Rise of Faithbased Welfare 267 The Great Society and Its Discontents: a Prehistory of Faithbased Welfare 272 Mediating Structures: an Agenda for Faithbased Welfare 285 A Long March Through the Institutions 295 The New Religious Freedom: Christian Public Interest Litigation 302 Charitable Choice: from Litigation to Legislation 308 Conclusion 312 Acknowledgments 318 Notes 320 Index 428 Zone Books Near Future Series 446 Why Was The Discourse Of Family Values So Pivotal To The Conservative And Free-market Revolution Of The 1980s And Why Has It Continued To Exert Such A Profound Influence On American Political Life? Why Have Free-market Neoliberals So Often Made Common Cause With Social Conservatives On The Question Of Family, Despite Their Differences On All Other Issues? In This Book, Melinda Cooper Challenges The Idea That Neoliberalism Privileges Atomized Individualism Over Familial Solidarities, And Contractual Freedom Over Inherited Status. Delving Into The History Of The American Poor Laws, She Shows How The Liberal Ethos Of Personal Responsibility Was Always Undergirded By A Wider Imperative Of Family Responsibility And How This Investment In Kinship Obligations Is Recurrently Facilitated The Working Relationship Between Free-market Liberals And Social Conservatives.^ Neoliberalism, She Argues, Must Be Understood As An Effort To Revive And Extend The Poor Law Tradition In The Contemporary Idiom Of Household Debt. As Neoliberal Policymakers Imposed Cuts To Health, Education, And Welfare Budgets, They Simultaneously Identified The Family As A Wholesale Alternative To The Twentieth-century Welfare State. And As The Responsibility For Deficit Spending Shifted From The State To The Household, The Private Debt Obligations Of Family Were Defined As Foundational To Socioeconomic Order. Despite Their Differences, Neoliberals And Social Conservatives Were In Agreement That The Bonds Of Family Needed To Be Encouraged -- And At The Limit Enforced --^ As A Necessary Counterpart To Market Freedom. In A Series Of Case Studies Ranging From Bill Clinton's Welfare Reform To The Aids Epidemic And From Same-sex Marriage To The Student Loan Crisis, Cooper Explores The Key Policy Contributions Made By Neoliberal Economists And Legal Theorists. Only By Restoring The Question Of Family To Its Central Place In The Neoliberal Project, She Argues, Can We Make Sense Of The Defining Political Alliance Of Our Times, That Between Free-market Economics And Social Conservatism. -- Between Neoliberalism And The New Social Conservatism -- The Moral Crisis Of Inflation : Neoliberalism, Neoconservatism, And The Demise Of The Family Wage -- The Ethic Of Family Responsibility : Reinventing The Poor Laws -- The Return Of Inherited Wealth : Asset Inflation And The Economic Family -- The Price Of Promiscuity : The Chicago School Confronts Aids -- In Loco Parentis : Human Capital, Student Debt, And The Logic Of Family Investment -- Theology Of The Social : The Rise Of Faith-based Welfare -- Conclusion -- Acknowledgments -- Notes -- Index. Melinda Cooper. Includes Bibliographical References And Index. An investigation of the roots of the alliance between free-market neoliberals and social conservatives. Why was the discourse of family values so pivotal to the conservative and free-market revolution of the 1980s and why has it continued to exert such a profound influence on American political life? Why have free-market neoliberals so often made common cause with social conservatives on the question of family, despite their differences on all other issues? In this book, Melinda Cooper challenges the idea that neoliberalism privileges atomized individualism over familial solidarities, and contractual freedom over inherited status. Delving into the history of the American poor laws, she shows how the liberal ethos of personal responsibility was always undergirded by a wider imperative of family responsibility and how this investment in kinship obligations recurrently facilitated the working relationship between free-market liberals and social conservatives. Neoliberalism, she argues, must be understood as an effort to revive and extend the poor law tradition in the contemporary idiom of household debt. As neoliberal policymakers imposed cuts to health, education, and welfare budgets, they simultaneously identified the family as a wholesale alternative to the twentieth-century welfare state. And as the responsibility for deficit spending shifted from the state to the household, the private debt obligations of family were defined as foundational to socio-economic order. Despite their differences, neoliberals and social conservatives were in agreement that the bonds of family needed to be encouraged and at the limit enforced as a necessary counterpart to market freedom. In a series of case studies ranging from Clintons welfare reform to the AIDS epidemic, and from same-sex marriage to the student loan crisis, Cooper explores the key policy contributions made by neoliberal economists and legal theorists. Only by restoring the question of family to its central place in the neoliberal project, she argues, can we make sense of the defining political alliance of our times, that between free-market economics and social conservatism. Why was the discourse of family values so pivotal to the conservative and free-market revolution of the 1980s and why has it continued to exert such a profound influence on American political life? Why have free-market neoliberals so often made common cause with social conservatives on the question of family, despite their differences on all other issues? In this book, Melinda Cooper challenges the idea that neoliberalism privileges atomized individualism over familial solidarities, and contractual freedom over inherited status. Delving into the history of the American poor laws, she shows how the liberal ethos of personal responsibility was always undergirded by a wider imperative of family responsibility and how this investment in kinship obligations is recurrently facilitated the working relationship between free-market liberals and social conservatives. Neoliberalism, she argues, must be understood as an effort to revive and extend the poor law tradition in the contemporary idiom of household debt. As neoliberal policymakers imposed cuts to health, education, and welfare budgets, they simultaneously identified the family as a wholesale alternative to the twentieth-century welfare state. And as the responsibility for deficit spending shifted from the state to the household, the private debt obligations of family were defined as foundational to socioeconomic order. Despite their differences, neoliberals and social conservatives were in agreement that the bonds of family needed to be encouraged -- and at the limit enforced -- as a necessary counterpart to market freedom. In a series of case studies ranging from Bill Clinton's welfare reform to the AIDS epidemic and from same-sex marriage to the student loan crisis, Cooper explores the key policy contributions made by neoliberal economists and legal theorists. Only by restoring the question of family to its central place in the neoliberal project, she argues, can we make sense of the defining political alliance of our times, that between free-market economics and social conservatism. -- Provided by publisher Why was the discourse of family values so pivotal to the conservative and free-market revolution of the 1980s and why has it continued to exert such a profound influence on American political life? Why have free-market neoliberals so often made common cause with social conservatives on the question of family, despite their differences on all other issues? In this book, Melinda Cooper challenges the idea that neoliberalism privileges atomized individualism over familial solidarities, and contractual freedom over inherited status. Delving into the history of the American poor laws, she shows how the liberal ethos of personal responsibility was always undergirded by a wider imperative of family responsibility and how this investment in kinship obligations is recurrently facilitated the working relationship between free-market liberals and social conservatives. Neoliberalism, she argues, must be understood as an effort to revive and extend the poor law tradition in the contemporary idio m of household debt. As neoliberal policymakers imposed cuts to health, education, and welfare budgets, they simultaneously identified the family as a wholesale alternative to the twentieth-century welfare state. And as the responsibility for deficit spending shifted from the state to the household, the private debt obligations of family were defined as foundational to socioeconomic order. Despite their differences, neoliberals and social conservatives were in agreement that the bonds of family needed to be encouraged -- and at the limit enforced-- as a necessary counterpart to market freedom. In a series of case studies ranging from Bill Clinton's welfare reform to the AIDS epidemic and from same-sex marriage to the student loan crisis, Cooper explores the key policy contributions made by neoliberal economists and legal theorists. Only by restoring the question of family to its central place in the neoliberal project, she argues, can we make sense of the defining political alliance of our times, that between free-market economics and social conservatism. -- Provided by publisher