{"title":"L’intérêt des vivants contre l'honneur des morts ? Retenir les corpsennemis à des fins de négociation","authors":"Étienne Dignat","doi":"10.3917/rai.083.0121","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3917/rai.083.0121","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":35193,"journal":{"name":"Raisons Politiques","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43780177","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
– Talking about basic income in the singular does not make much sense. Evaluating such a proposition in the abstract, without specifying what kind of basic income we are talking about, even less so. For it is an instrument that can be used for a diversity of purposes and with varied effects depending on the political project guiding its implementation. Therefore, this article proposes to distinguish between three ideal types of basic income: neoliberal, social-democratic, and of ecological and social transition. These ideal types distinguish themselves by their internal characteristics (amount; financing; articulation with existing social protection) and by the political projects that guide them. The question of the radicality of the basic income proposal thus depends on the model envisaged. The "neoliberal" model is radical in the simplification of the welfare state it proposes, while the "transition" model is radical in its aim to transform social relations and economic dynamics. The "social-democratic" model, in contrast, does not intend to revolutionize social protection, but rather to introduce a reform that, while being more realistic in the short term, is
{"title":"Trois modèles de revenu de base","authors":"P. Vandamme","doi":"10.3917/rai.083.0017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3917/rai.083.0017","url":null,"abstract":"– Talking about basic income in the singular does not make much sense. Evaluating such a proposition in the abstract, without specifying what kind of basic income we are talking about, even less so. For it is an instrument that can be used for a diversity of purposes and with varied effects depending on the political project guiding its implementation. Therefore, this article proposes to distinguish between three ideal types of basic income: neoliberal, social-democratic, and of ecological and social transition. These ideal types distinguish themselves by their internal characteristics (amount; financing; articulation with existing social protection) and by the political projects that guide them. The question of the radicality of the basic income proposal thus depends on the model envisaged. The \"neoliberal\" model is radical in the simplification of the welfare state it proposes, while the \"transition\" model is radical in its aim to transform social relations and economic dynamics. The \"social-democratic\" model, in contrast, does not intend to revolutionize social protection, but rather to introduce a reform that, while being more realistic in the short term, is","PeriodicalId":35193,"journal":{"name":"Raisons Politiques","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43346847","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：