Criticism and crisis of the welfare state
by Riccardo Piroddi
Abstract: Gli anni Sessanta del ‘900 sono stati un decennio di profonde trasformazioni politiche e sociali, lontani dall’essere un periodo di reale pace. Nonostante la distensione tra i blocchi della Guerra fredda, emersero nuove tensioni interne agli Stati, conflitti ideologici e crisi legate alla decolonizzazione, che posero le basi dell’ordine politico globale contemporaneo. Centrale è stato il processo di decolonizzazione, segnato da guerre civili, dal ruolo del movimento dei non allineati e da diverse elaborazioni teoriche e politiche, da Fanon a Mao, fino ai movimenti rivoluzionari in Asia, Africa e America Latina. Questi conflitti impattarono sul mondo occidentale, in particolare attraverso la guerra del Vietnam e i movimenti del 1968, che misero in discussione capitalismo, autorità e modelli sociali dominanti.
The 1960s, often marked by significant political experimentation and transformation, cannot be regarded as a time of true “peace.” Although the intense military and political tensions between the Eastern and Western blocs began to ease, new internal and external contradictions emerged within individual states and within the major geopolitical alliances. This decade saw the seeds of the political landscape that would eventually define the early 21st century, as social movements, ideological conflicts, and regional struggles reshaped global dynamics.
Internally, many Western states faced challenges such as civil rights movements, anti-war protests, and the rise of new leftist ideologies that questioned the status quo. In Eastern bloc nations, economic stagnation and political repression created simmering discontent. Meanwhile, the decolonization process led to political instability and new forms of conflict in former colonies, further complicating global geopolitics.
The political developments of the 1960s, from social upheaval to ideological confrontations, laid the groundwork for the complex and interconnected global order that would emerge in the new millennium. This era highlighted that even in a time of détente between superpowers, deep-rooted issues of inequality, governance, and national sovereignty persisted, shaping the trajectory of future political conflicts and alliances.
Decolonization and imperialism
One of the most pivotal phenomena in post-war international politics was the process of decolonization, significantly driven by the non-aligned movement, which was spearheaded by former Yugoslav president Josip Tito. This movement gained prominence at the Bandung International Conference, providing a platform for newly independent nations to assert their political autonomy outside the influence of the Cold War superpowers. Between 1945 and 1983, the decolonization process led to the outbreak of numerous civil wars, as former colonies grappled with the challenges of self-governance, internal divisions, and the legacies of colonial rule.
Several theoretical frameworks emerged during this time, shaping the intellectual and political discourse in many Third World countries:
The négritude theory of Senegalese poet and politician Léopold Senghor, which celebrated African identity and cultural heritage as a response to colonial oppression
The theory of Pan-Africanism, advocated by Ghanaian leader Kwame Nkrumah, which sought to unite African nations in a collective struggle against colonialism and neocolonialism
The doctrine of non-violence championed by Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, which emphasized peaceful resistance as a powerful tool for political change.
These ideologies were not mere attempts to reclaim traditional cultures, but rather represented conscious efforts to counteract the growing Westernization of the world. By incorporating traditional elements into their political development strategies, these movements sought to forge new pathways toward modernization that were culturally relevant. However, without sufficient adaptation to the unique socio-political realities of each country, many of these approaches struggled to be fully effective in the complex and varied landscapes of the developing world.
It is important to recognize that the term “Third World” encompasses a highly diverse group of countries, each with distinct political, economic, and social contexts. This diversity meant that a singular political or developmental strategy could not be universally applied across these nations. Success in international cooperation and development, therefore, required nuanced and context-specific approaches that accounted for the unique challenges faced by each region.
Key moments of the decolonization era can be understood through several pivotal events and intellectual movements that shaped the political landscape of the mid-20th century:
Decolonization in Africa: A significant challenge for Third World countries, particularly in Black Africa, was the incompatibility of importing Western values into societies with vastly different historical and cultural contexts. One of the most influential voices in this discourse was Frantz Fanon (1925-1961), who argued that colonial liberation could only be achieved through violent struggle. Fanon’s theory called for not just the physical liberation from colonial rule but also a psychological liberation from the stereotypes and dehumanizing images imposed on colonized peoples. He advocated for a return to an “authentic” African identity, free from colonial influences. Drawing on Hegel’s “lord-bondsman” dialectic, Fanon viewed the colonial system as one of extreme asymmetry, exemplified by institutionalized racism and apartheid, particularly in South Africa and Zimbabwe. According to Fanon, the colonial order crumbles when the principle of global equality is realized, and the colonized come to understand that their lives and rights are fundamentally equal to those of their colonizers. This recognition sparks the decolonization process, exposing the flawed nature of gradual modernization efforts led by colonial powers, which in reality masked ongoing forms of domination by Western states over former colonies. The emergence of national consciousness among the colonized peoples was the driving force behind their struggles for independence
The rise of China: In East Asia, decolonization theories were intertwined with the rise of Communist China, where the rural masses played a central role in revolutionary thinking. Influenced by Marxism but adapted to China’s unique conditions, the theories of Lin Piao (1907-1971) and Mao Zedong (1893-1976) framed the revolution as a process in which the countryside “surrounded” and eventually overpowered the cities. The “Cultural Revolution” and the growing technical expertise in administration were central to the establishment of the People’s Republic of China in 1949. Mao’s political philosophy rested on three key tenets:
The primacy of the political, meaning that ideological control and political leadership supersede all other concerns
The mass line, which emphasized direct engagement with the masses and their active participation in shaping policy
The centrality of the countryside, which reversed the Marxist focus on the urban proletariat, instead making rural peasants the key agents of revolution. These elements allowed Marxist ideas to take root in a society very different from the industrialized conditions Marx had envisioned. Mao also highlighted the importance of individual agency in the revolutionary process and conducted extensive inquiries into the social transformations occurring in China.
Decolonization as an assertion of people’s rights: Decolonization also became a platform for affirming the intangible rights of peoples, particularly in regions like the Middle East, Latin America, and Southeast Asia. The Chinese experience, which elevated the concept of the “people” as central to political legitimacy, influenced leaders like Egypt’s Gamal Abdel Nasser and Argentina’s Juan Domingo Perón, who pursued populist and nationalist policies aimed at achieving social justice. Similarly, in Vietnam, Ho Chi Minh led the fight for independence through a blend of Marxist theory and nationalist sentiment. These movements were unified by the belief that popular consent, whether achieved through democratic or revolutionary means, was fundamental to political life.
This framework was also reflected in the Marxist-inspired guerrilla movements of the time, particularly those led by figures like Ernesto “Che” Guevara. Guevara’s political philosophy, encapsulated in the phrase “patria o muerte” (homeland or death), demonstrated the power of popular forces to overcome regular, better-equipped armies. He believed that revolution could succeed even when conditions were not fully ripe for change. Latin America became a “theater” of revolutionary activity, with Guevara’s doctrines inspiring numerous guerrilla movements across the continent, advocating that underprepared but highly motivated forces could triumph over established military powers through sustained people’s war.
These moments of decolonization were thus marked by a diverse range of ideologies, united by a shared rejection of colonial domination and a quest for self-determination, often blending Marxist theory with local political realities.
The revolution in the West
The conflicts in the Third World, particularly the Vietnam War (1964–1969), which culminated in the unprecedented defeat of the U.S. military, had a profound impact on the political landscape of the West. The war not only fuelled the rise of pacifist movements—first in the U.S. and later across the Western world—but also deepened the ideological divide between the capitalist and communist blocs. The global resonance of these conflicts radicalized opposition between these two systems, making the Vietnam War a focal point for broader critiques of Western imperialism and capitalist domination.
The complex events of 1968 can be understood in this broader geopolitical context. The movements that arose during this period—whether student uprisings, workers’ strikes, or critiques of the welfare state—were united in their rejection of the U.S.-USSR Cold War bipolarism. They also challenged the prevailing notions of political power, authority, and subjectivity, calling into question the structures that upheld both capitalist and communist dominance. These movements were driven by a wide range of concerns, from the repression of workers’ rights to the alienation caused by mass production and consumerism in welfare societies.
The intellectual foundations of these movements were varied, drawing from both Marxist orthodoxy, which regained relevance for its critical insights, and the critical theories of the Frankfurt School, particularly the work of Herbert Marcuse. Marcuse’s One-Dimensional Man: Studies in the Ideology of Advanced Industrial Society became a key text for the 1968 movements. In it, Marcuse critiqued the totalitarian tendencies of capitalist societies, arguing that they subsumed individual freedoms and desires in favour of a technocratic system that served industrial and economic growth. His analysis suggested that the capitalist system, under the guise of technological advancement and consumer comfort, perpetuated a form of repression that stifled human creativity, individuality, and sexual freedom.
Additionally, the movements of the late 1960s were influenced by the development of psychoanalysis as a tool for understanding the repressive mechanisms of bourgeois society. The focus on sexuality, repression, and the conservative role of social norms became central to the countercultural critique. These critiques did not just target political structures but also extended to cultural and social mores, emphasizing a need for deeper psychological liberation from the constraints of traditional, bourgeois values.
Thus, the events of 1968 were not isolated national or regional revolts but part of a global challenge to established power structures, ideologies, and the authoritarian nature of both capitalist and communist regimes. The period marked a significant moment of questioning the entire conceptual framework of politics, authority, and societal norms.
African-American movements
The African-American protests of the late 1960s, particularly after the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. in 1968, marked a critical point in the civil rights movement. These protests, grounded in the fight for equality, also reflected a broader philosophical shift towards understanding equality as a recognition of difference, a concept that resonated across various social movements of the era. The wave of protests that followed King’s death spread rapidly, and even his emphasis on non-violent resistance—an approach that he had consistently advocated—was met with severe repression by American public institutions.
For King, the restoration of fundamental rights to African Americans was not an inevitable outcome of integration but required a profound societal transformation. He believed that true equality for African Americans could only be achieved through a multilayered restructuring of social, economic, and political institutions. King’s vision was rooted in a broader call for justice that transcended mere legal rights, demanding an overhaul of the deeply entrenched systems of racial and economic oppression.
In contrast, more radical figures like Malcolm X and Marcus Garvey offered a different approach to the racial struggle. Malcolm X, in particular, established a critical link between capitalism and racism, arguing that the exploitation of African Americans was tied to the larger capitalist system. His vision of Black liberation was interwoven with ideas of racial superiority, socialism, and, at times, an Islamic resurgence, advocating for a more militant approach to achieve African-American autonomy. Garvey’s earlier Pan-Africanism and black nationalism laid the groundwork for these ideas, emphasizing self-reliance, racial pride, and the establishment of a separate black identity.
The rise of Black Power, as a movement advocating for African-American self-determination and control over their own communities, crystallized these ideas. The formation of the Black Panther Party represented the most organized effort to realize this vision, advocating for armed self-defence and the empowerment of African Americans through community programs, education, and direct confrontation with oppressive state systems. However, the Black Panthers, while initially focused on community resilience and justice, became increasingly associated with violent tactics. Some factions within the movement degenerated into terrorist activities, with many believing that these developments were exacerbated, if not directly provoked, by the capitalist and state apparatus to discredit and suppress the movement.
The evolution of these African-American protests, from King’s non-violent approach to the radicalism of Malcolm X, Garvey, and the Black Panthers, underscored the deep fractures within American society and the different paths envisioned for achieving racial equality and justice. These movements were not only about racial rights but were also deeply intertwined with broader critiques of capitalism, imperialism, and state power, reflecting the complex dynamics of the era.
