The traditional theory of ‘laissez faire’ has been given up and the old ‘police state’ has now become ‘welfare state’

The traditional theory of ‘laissez faire’ has been given up and the old ‘police state’ has now become ‘welfare state’-illustrate & explain

Introduction

The first movement of ‘laissez faire’ promoted widely by the doctrine of natural. The laws of nature that govern the state with economic activity, the life, liberty and property should be protected in order to allow interference. This was the cause of the nation’s economic and financial chaos suffered under the Statute of the Union. The aim was to ensure that the loss of political independence won dearly economically by being financially dependent on the authorities and the princes. The police power of the state is a party usually a single arbitrary exercise of police repression by the political, economic, and social and government control over aspects of life as a result within a society become a welfare state.

Laissez faire

Laissez faire is an economic environment in which transactions between private parties’ tariffs, government subsidies, and government regulation is enforced only against theft and aggressive enough to protect the property rights of Monopoly. It is a philosophy or practice is usually that there is no guidance or intervention, especially with individual freedom of choice and action. Scholars generally believe in the case of laissez faire or completely free market did not exist.

Police state

Police state is the country in which the government of the strict controls and repressive social and economic life and political rights of the population. A police state typically exhibits elements of totalitarianism and social control, and law and the exercise of political power by the executive is usually little or no distinction. A police state experience restrictions on their mobility inhabitants, and their independence or expressing political or other views, which are subject to police monitoring or enforcement contacts.

Welfare state

A welfare state is a government “of the State to protect and promote the economic and social welfare of its citizens is a core role. It is equality of opportunity, equitable distribution of wealth, and those who are unable to avail themselves of a better life for at least based on the principle of the responsibility for the public. Welfare state is financed through tax redistribution and often “mixed economy” is known as a type such as taxation for people with higher incomes typically includes a large income tax, called a progressive tax.

Comparison between the ‘police state’ and the ’welfare state’

In light of the differences between the following points and down the list of ‘police state’ and ‘welfare state’ are

· The role of government

· The underlying political philosophy

· Individual liberty and freedom

· Extent of power of the government

This has necessitated a change in the role of government, and the transition from a ‘police state’ to ‘welfare state’ on the need to give more power to manage and one need to control this power. The incremental increase in two directions i.e. the ability to somehow versus control, conflict and struggle for them to reflect the increase in administrative law.

Administrative law of the state of social, economic and function of government to grow, increased by products. It is very necessary to improve the power of society and the administrative authorities of the extremely complex. In order to control this complex relationship, the law requires that the discipline, can bring certainty and at the same time, you can check the misuse of entrusted administration.

In ancient societies state actions were very low, being in a foreign attack, levying taxes, and maintenance of internal peace and order and security in the long. Administrative law is a direct result of the rapid growth in modern times to increase the administrative capacity. The theory of laissez faire in the 19th century envisages minimum government control, maximum free enterprise and contractual freedom. The law and order was characterized situation in the state. Its role was limited to the traditional role of government such as a protector. The government is responsible for the management of social and economic life is not considered. But laissez faire doctrine resulted in human misery.

The unequal bargaining power between labor and management labor exploitation resulted in dangerous working conditions and child labor in the field. Consequently, the concentration of wealth in a few hands led to spread of poverty.[1] Then it came to be recognized that the state played an active role in ameliorating the condition. This method is favored state intervention, social control, and controls the growth of individual enterprise. ‘Negative state’ then forced to assume a positive role. Time, the doctrine must be out of collectivism, ‘social welfare state’ of the state role in social, economic-regeneration and the welfare state as a vehicle emphasis is laid. Thus, the growth of the administrative law is to be attributed to a change of philosophy as to the role and function of the state.

Characteristics of a modern ‘welfare state’

There are some characteristics which led to build a ‘welfare state’ such as:[2]

· A vast increase in the range and detail of government regulation of privately owned economic enterprise,

· The direct furnishing of services by government to individual members of the community, and

· Increased government ownership and operation of industries and businesses.

Welfare state in carrying out these tasks effectively and wide to achieve social and economic justice, and will come in the inevitability of a direct relationship with the citizens. Therefore, to achieve social and economic justice, being a conscious goal of state policy, is inevitable and substantial increase in the frequency with ordinary citizens that come in direct relation to a meeting with the holders of state power. Achieve balance and harmony between justice and power is the central task of administrative law.

Clearly, the political and economic conditions are resulting from the existence of administrative law. Administrative Law was created as a tool to control the power of an ever-expanding government. As once said Acton, “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” The concentration of power in government, if not properly regulated and controlled and effectively, always a person’s freedom of rights and freedoms and the potential hazards. Administrative law was developed as a response to the threats of ‘big government.’

Big government or what is referred to, as the welfare state, is the product of a response to the economic, social and political reality of the 19th century. Contemporary political theory laissez faire freedom to hear, poor economic and social ills of poverty, ignorance, and exploitation of the mass of the solution bearing failed. Due to the importance was attached by the wider freedom of the individual, and interference from the government minimum and only strength.

The administrative law was almost non-existent in this time. When the government’s authority is limited and less, then the degree of interaction with the individual is minimal. Thus, the need for administrative law as a power control mechanism becomes irrelevant in these situations.[3]

The evolution of administrative law goes in a parallel progressive stage with the transformation of the ‘police state’ to the ‘welfare state.’ The reason behind why the transition necessitated giving more power to the state. Pitfalls, the defects and deficiencies in the ‘police state’ clear at the end of the 20th century, particularly after the Second World War. The suffering, the poverty and the exploitation of mass population were sufficient to justify the need to give more power to the government. With more powers, the government also assumed new roles geared towards alleviating the social and economic problems and social evils to achieve development and social justice and equitable distribution of wealth. Administrative law is a response to the problem of energy. They accept unequivocally need or necessity of power, stressing at the same time the need to ensure the exercise of this authority within appropriate limits and legal limits. Control over the exercise of power and excesses are the essence of the mission and administrative law.

Conclusion

The traditional theory of ‘laissez faire’ has been change in the role of government and thereby the transformation of the ‘police state’ to the ‘welfare state’ has necessitated the need for conferring more power on the administration and simultaneously the need for controlling this power. The welfare state in effectively carrying out these vast functions to attain socio-economic justice, inevitability will come in direct relationship and encounter with the private citizens. Therefore, the attainment of socio economic justice, being a conscious goal of state policy, is a vast and inevitable increase in the frequency with which ordinary citizens come into relationship of direct encounter with state power holders.[4]

References

· Will, T. & Ariel, D. (1967). Rousseau and the Revolution, Simon and Schuster Press, pp. 71-77.

· Bourgin & Frank (1989). The Great Challenge: The Myth of Laissez-Faire in the Early Republic. New York, NY: George Braziller Inc.

· A Dictionary of World History, Market House Books, Oxford University Press, 2000.

· Buder & Stanley ( 2009). <href=”#v=onepage&q=has%20never%20existed&f=false”>Capitalizing on Change: A Social History of American Business , p. 13.

· Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/laissez-faire

· Hessen, R. (n.d). A fully free economy, true laissez-faire, never has existed. Retrieved from http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Capitalism.html

· Dubreuil, Benoit (2010). Human Evolution and the Origins of Hierarchies: The State of Nature. Cambridge University Press. p. 189.

· Anthony, P. (1999).”Welfare state.” Encyclopedia of Political Economy. p. 1245

· Edwards, K.P. and Elger, T. (1999). The global economy, national states and the regulation of labour, p, 111

· Harsanyi, J. C. (1953). Cardinal utility in welfare economics and the theory of risk-taking. Journal oJl’oliticu1 Economy 61,pp.334-5.

· Blakemore, S. Timothy, D. & Green, B. (2004) Law for Legal the Executives (Ed.), Oxford University Press.

· Bell, S. and Brown, L.N. (1993). French Administrative Law .Oxford University Press.

· Cane, A. and Peter, D. (1966). An Introduction to Administrative Law (3rd ed.), Oxford University Press.

· Cumper, V., Peter, R., and Walters, T. (2001). Constitutional & Administrative Law. Oxford University Press.

· Scholler, A., Heinrich, T. and Ethiopian, G.(2005). Constitutional and Legal Development (Rudiger Koppe Verlag, Volume I)

· Diamond, P. H., Helms, L. J. and Mirrlees, J. A. (1980). Optimal taxation in a stochastic economy. Joltrtzal of Atblic Economics 13. 1-29.

· Geeenheld, J.,Robert, L.,and Leland, B. (1983). A laissez-faire approach to monetary stability. Journal of money ,Credit, and Banking, pp.302-15

· Thomas, E. (1987).On parallelism in neo-classical economic theory. International Journal of Social Economics 14,pp.191-98.

· Chapman, B., (2008).The Police State, Government and Opposition, Vol.3:4, Retrieved from http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/119912141/abstract, pp.428-440

· Phillip , A. H. (1999). “Welfare state.” Encyclopedia of Political Economy. Ed. Routledge, p. 1245

· Emanuele , F. and Martin, S. K. (2011). Welfare regime debate: past, present, futures. Policy & Politics, vol. 39 (4). p. 584.

· Atkinson, A. B. (1995). Incomes and the Welfare State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

· Elaine, G. S. (1979) “Rules of the Ruhr: Leadership and Authority in German Big Business Before 1914,” Business History Review, Vol. 53 Issue 1, pp 40-64

· Steven P. C. (1998). Theories of Regulation: Incorporating the Administrative Process, 98 CoLum. L. rev. 1.

· Philip, H. (1984) Dispute Resolution and Administrative Law: The History, Needs, and Future of a Complex Relationship, 29 Vill. L. Rev 1393 and the discussion of alternative dispute resolution techniques

· Douglas C. M. 1996). Cooperative Implementation of Federal Regulations, 13 Yale J. on Reg. 535, 541

· Gerald, E. F, (1990). Administrative Democracy, 40 U. Toronto L.J. 559 (1990);

· Richard, B. (1975). The Reformation of American Administrative Law, 88 Harv. L. Rev. 166

· Kenworthy, L. (1999). Do social-welfare policies increase power? Social Forces, 77(3), 119-139.

[1] Chapman, B., (2008).The Police State, Government and Opposition, Vol.3:4, Retrieved from http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/119912141/abstract, pp.428-440

[2] Emanuele , F. and Martin, S. K. (2011). Welfare regime debate: past, present, futures. Policy & Politics, vol. 39 (4). p. 584.

[3] Douglas C. M. 1996). Cooperative Implementation of Federal Regulations, 13 Yale J. on Reg. 535, 541

[4] Kenworthy, L. (1999). Do social-welfare policies increase power? Social Forces, 77(3), 119-139.