Georg Simmel - The Poor

The Poor
Author(s): Georg Simmel and Claire Jacobson

Source: Social Problems, Vol. 13, No. 2 (Autumn, 1965), pp. 118-140
Published by: Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for the Study of Social
Problems
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/798898
Accessed: 07-03-2018 19:31 UTC
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
Oxford University Press, Society for the Study of Social Problems are collaborating
with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Social Problems
This content downloaded from 178.3.13.241 on Wed, 07 Mar 2018 19:31:45 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
118 SOCIAL PROBLEMS
once departed from his us

would expect-give usual way of
some important
theoretical observations.
playing the sociological game. Sociologists
Not so.
This is no social survey, such
generally deal with as as
deviation Charles
de-
Booth's, which describes
parture from normsin detail
in but one direc- the
tion.poor
condition of the In fact, it and
is common for
tries to
deviations in either direction
determine the "poverty to be dis-
line."3 This
is no effort, as of the
approved of. American
A person-although Sim-muck-
mel does not say
rakers of that period, to so in this connection
bring about
reform by exposing-may work
the too horrors
much, be too good,of life
or too
in the slum. It is modest. The the
simply saints-who
longest
and most thorough analysis
practice the Simmel
ordinary virtues in heroic
degree-areproblem
made of a particular often stoned before they
in his
are canonized. It is it
Soziologie; he undertakes just in
suchhis
adding
usual way. One doubts whether
of another, Simmel
unexpected dimension to
ever visited Alexanderplatz.
analysis that makes SimmelLewis
so intrigu
Coser, however, shows
ing. I read us the
Simmel notuses
so much tofor
which Simmel's style of say
what he may work can be
about religion, law,
put by a sociologist who joins
or poverty-although thatdelight
may be very
in sociological analysis
rewarding-aswith concern
for these ideas, thes
for social action. additional dimensions which make the
In the course of
studyplaying
of all aspects of his game
society one
with The Poor, Simmel does-as one enterprise, both useful and intellectu-
ally delightful.
3 Life and Labour of the People of
London, 18 vols, London, 1892-1903.
THE POOR
GEORG SIMMEL
Translated by Claire Jacobson*
Insofar as man is a social being,with

to obligations in one way or another
each of his obligations there also
cor-possesses rights, a network of
rights and obligations is thus formed,
responds a right on the part of others.
Perhaps even the more profoundwhere con- right is always the primary ele-
ception would be to think that origi- ment that sets the tone, and obligation
nally only rights existed; that iseach nothing more than its correlate in
individual has demands which are of the same act and, indeed, an inevitable
a general human character and the re- correlate.
sult of his particular condition, and Society in general may be regarded
which afterward become the obliga- as a reciprocity of beings endowed
tions of others. But since every person with moral, legal, conventional, and
many other kinds of rights. If these
* Translated from Georg Simmel, "Der
Arme," Chapter 7 in Soziologie: Untersuch- rights imply obligations for others,
ungen iiber die Formen der Vergesell- this is simply, so to speak, a logical
schaftung, Leipzig: Duncker and Humblot, or technical consequence; and if the
1908, pp. 454-493. I wish to thank Pro- unimaginable should happen-that is
fessor Juan J. Linz for his invaluable as- to say, if it were possible to satisfy
sistance in the preparation of this transla-
tion. every right in such a way that it would
The Poor 119
not imply tions, fulfillment

the but for morality itself he is no
of
tion-society
more would
than the terminus inad quem.no In
the category of
the final obligatio
analysis, we ourselves are the
radicalism that
only onescertainly doe
responsible for the morality
respond to of our acts; we are responsible for r
psychological
which could them
be onlydeveloped
to our better selves, to ourin
of an ethical-ideal
self-esteem, or whatever construwe wish to
call this enigmatic
could interpret all the focus which prestthe
love and compassion,
soul finds in itself as the of final gene
judge
religious impulse,
that decides freely upas to what righ
point
beneficiary. Ethical
the rights rigori
of others are obligations.
ready asserted,This fundamental
in the dualism in the
face o
motivations,basic sentimentsthe
that which govern the
highes
a man can aspire
course of moral is to
action is do hi
exemplified
or empirically symbolized by
that the fulfillment of variousdut
by definition precisely
conceptions that exist in relation to as- th
sistance toway
self-adulatory the poor. The of
obligations
thin
siders a merit above
we have toward the poor may duty.
appear
step from this
as a simple ethical rigor
correlate of the rights of
behind every duty
the poor. Especially inof the
countries where pe
an obligation,
begging isthere isthethe
a normal occupation,
the claimant; indeed,
beggar believes more or lessthis
naively se
the ultimate that
and he has amost
right to alms rationa
and fre-
tion on whichquently the
considers that their denial
mutual p
of men may be
means based.
the withholding of a tribute to
which he is entitled.
A fundamental Another and com-
opposition
the sociological and
pletely different ethical
characteristic-in the
manifests itself here.
same category-implies Inasmu
the idea that
relations of the right to assistance is based
prestation are on der
a right-in the widest
the group affiliation of the needy. sen
One pointincludes,
concept which of view according to which am
the individual
elements, legal is merely the product
right-the re
between man of his and
social milieu man has t
confers upon that
bued the moral values of the indi- individual the right to solicit from
vidual and determined his course. the group compensation for every
However, in contrast to the undoubted
situation of need and every loss. But
idealism of this point of view, even
thereif such an extreme dissolution of
individual responsibility is not ac-
is the no less deeply based rejection
cepted, one may stress, from a social
of any interindividual genesis of duty.
Our duties (from this standpoint)-viewpoint, that the rights of the needy
it is said-are duties only toward are the basis of all assistance to the
poor. For only if we assume such
ourselves and there are no others.
Their content may be the conduct
rights, at least as a socio-legal fiction,
toward other men, but their form
does it appear possible to protect
and motivation as duty do not derive
public assistance from arbitrariness and
dependence upon a chance financial
from others, but are generated with
full autonomy by the self andsituation
its or other uncertain factors.
own purely internal demands, being
Everywhere the predictability of func-
independent of anything that liestions
out- is improved whenever in the
side of it. It is only in the case of
correlation between the rights and
obligations
right that the other is the terminus a that underlie them right
quo of moti'vation in our moral ac-
constitutes the methodological point of
120 SOCIAL PROBLEMS
departure; forliable
man, for his claims against society. i
in general,
more easily disposed to which
This leads to a scale demand
goes from a
right than to fulfill an proletarian
the delinquent obligation.who sees in
To this may be any added
well-dressed the
person anhuman-
enemy, a
itarian motive of representative
making of the
it "exploiting"
easier fo
the poor person class to who can be robbed
request and in good
accep
assistance, whenconscience, by doing sobeggar
to the humble he who only
exercises his due right;
asks for charity "forfor
the love the
of God," h
miliation, shame, as though
and each individual had the obli-th
ddclassement
charity implies gation are ofovercome
filling the holes of for hi
the order
to the extent that it is not conceded which God desired but has not fully
out of compassion or sense of duty implemented. The poor man addresses
or utility, but because he canhis
laydemands in this case to the indi-
claim to it. Since this right naturally
vidual; however, not to a specific in-
dividual, but to the individual on the
has limits, which must be determined
basis
in each individual case, the right to of the solidarity of mankind.
Beyond this correlation which allows
assistance will not modify these mo-
any particular individual to appear as
tivations in the material quantitative
a representative of the totality of exis-
aspect with respect to other motiva-
tence with respect to the demands
tions. By making it a right, its inner
meaning is determined and is raiseddirected
to to that totality, there are
multiple particular collectivities to
a fundamental opinion about the rela-
tionship between the individual which
and the claims of the poor are
other individuals and between the indi-
addressed. The State, municipality,
vidual and the totality. The right to parish, professional association, circle
assistance belongs in the same category of friends, family, may, as total enti-
as the right to work and the right ties, maintain a variety of relationships
to life. It is true in this case that the with their members; but each of these
ambiguity of the quantitative limits, relationships appears to include an ele-
which characterizes this as well as ment which is manifested as the right
other "human rights," reaches its to assistance in the event of im-
max-
imum, especially if assistance is in poverishment of the individual. This
cash; for the purely quantitative characteristic
and is the common element
relative character of money makes of such
it sociological relationships, al-
much more difficult objectively to though
de- in other respects they are of
limit requests than assistance in highly kind heterogeneous character. The
-except in complex or highly indi- rights of the poor which are generated
vidualized cases in which the poor by such ties are curiously mixed under
person may make a more usefulprimitive and conditions, where the indi-
fruitful application of money than vidual
of is dominated by the tribal
assistance in kind, with its providential customs and religious obligations that
character. constitute an undifferentiated unity.
It is also unclear to whom the rights Among the ancient Semites, the right
of the poor ought to be addressed, ofand
the poor to participate in a meal
the solution of this question reveals is not associated with personal gener-
very deep sociological differences.osity, The but rather with social affiliation
poor person who perceives his condi- and with religious custom. Where as-
tion as an injustice of the cosmic order sistance to the poor has its raison
and who asks for redress, so to speak, d'etre in an organic link between ele-
from the entire creation will easily ments, the rights of the poor are more
consider any individual who highly is in emphasized, whether their re-
better circumstances than he jointly ligious premise derives from a meta-
The Poor 121
physical energies or
unity more productive,
their and so kins
as to
basis from a the
prevent biological
degeneration of their prog- u
will see, oneny.the
The poor mancontrary
as a person, and
assistance the
to the
perception of his poor
position in his d
ologically own
frommind, are in thisa
case goal
as indiffer- o
pursue in this
ent as theyway,
are to the giverrathe
who gives
the causal basis of a real and effective alms for the salvation of his own soul.
unity among all the members of the In this case, the subjective egoism of
group, the rights of the poor dwindle the latter is overcome not for the sake
to nothingness. of the poor, but for the sake of society.
In the cases examined so far, a The fact that the poor receive alms is
right and an obligation seemed to benot an end-in-itself but merely a means
two aspects of an absolute relation- to an end, the same as in the case of
ship. Completely new forms appear, the man who gives alms for the sake
however, when the point of departure of his salvation. The predominance of
is the obligation of the giver rather the social point of view with reference
to alms is shown in the fact that the
than the right of the recipient. In the
extreme case, the poor disappear com- giving can be refused from that same
pletely as legitimate subjects and
social point of view, and this fre-
central foci of the interests involved. quently happens when personal com-
The motive for alms then resides ex- passion or the unpleasantness of re-
clusively in the significance of giving
fusing would move us strongly to give.
for the giver. When Jesus told the
Assistance to the poor, as a public
institution, thus has a unique so-
wealthy young man, "Give your riches
to the poor," what apparently mat-
ciological character. It is absolutely
tered to him were not the poor, but
personal; it does nothing but alleviate
rather the soul of the wealthy man
individual needs. In this respect, it
for whose salvation this sacrifice was differs from other institutions which
merely a means or symbol. Later on,pursue public welfare and security.
Christian alms retained the same char- These institutions attempt to fulfill
acter; they represent no more than a the needs of all citizens: the army and
form of asceticism, of "good works,"police, the schools and public works,
which improve the chances of salva-the administration of justice and the
tion of the giver. The rise of beggingChurch, popular representation and
in the Middle Ages, the senseless dis- the pursuit of science are not, in prin-
tribution of alms, the demoralization ciple, directed toward persons con-
of the proletariat through arbitrary sidered as differentiated individuals,
donations contrary to all creative work, but rather toward the totality of these
all these phenomena constitute the re-individuals; the unity of many or all
venge, so to speak, that alms take foris the purpose of these institutions.
the purely subjectivistic motive of theirAssistance to the poor, on the other
concession-a motive which concerns hand, is focused in its concrete activity'
only the giver but not the recipient. on the individual and his situation.
And indeed this individual, in the
As soon as the welfare of society
requires assistance to the poor, the abstract
mo- modern type of welfare, is the
tivation turns away from this focus
final action but in no way the final
on the giver without, thereby, turning
purpose, which consists solely in the
to the recipient. This assistance then
protection and furtherance of the com-
takes place voluntarily or is imposed
munity. The poor cannot even be con-
sidered as a means to this end-which
by law, so that the poor will not be-
come active and dangerous enemies of improve their position-for so-
would
society, so as to make their reducedcial action does not make use of them,.
122 SOCIAL PROBLEMS
but only of certain objective

tralist teleology material
prevails, assistance to
and administrative means aimed atthe poor offers perhaps the greatest
suppressing the dangers and losses
sociological tension between the direct
and the indirect goals of an action.
which the poor imply for the common
The
good. This formal situation is not onlyalleviation of personal need is
valid for the total collectivity, but
emotionally so categorical an end-in-
also for smaller circles. Even within itself, that to deprive it of this ultimate
the family there are many acts ofpurpose
as- and to convert it into a mere
sistance, not for the sake of the recip-
technique for the transsubjective ends
ient himself, but so that the familyof a social unit constitutes a significant
triumph for the latter. This distantia-
need not be ashamed and lose its repu-
tation owing to the poverty of onetion
of between the individual and the
its members. The aid which English
social unit-despite its lack of visi-
bility-is more fundamental and radi-
trade unions grant to their unemployed
members does not purport so muchcal toin its abstractness and coldness
than sacrifices of the individual for
alleviate the personal situation of the
the collectivity in which the means and
recipient as to prevent that the unem-
the ends tend to be bound together
ployed, prompted by necessity, should
work more cheaply and that this by a chain of sentiments.
should result in lower wages for theThis basic sociological relationship
entire trade. explains the peculiar complications of
If we take into consideration this rights and duties which we find in
meaning of assistance to the poor, modern
it assistance to the poor by the
becomes clear that the fact of takingState. Frequently we find the principle
according to which the State has the
away from the rich to give to the poor
obligation to assist the poor, but to
does not aim at equalizing their indi-
vidual positions and is not, even thisin obligation there is no correspon-
its orientation, directed at suppressing
ding right to assistance on the part of
the social difference between the rich the poor. As has been expressly de-
and the poor. On the contrary, assist- clared in England for example, the
ance is based on the structure of so- poor person has no recourse to action
ciety, whatever it may be; it is infor unjust refusal of assistance, nor
open contradiction to all socialist andcan he solicit compensation for ille-
communist aspirations which would gally refused assistance. All the rela-
abolish this social structure. The goaltions between obligations and rights
of assistance is precisely to mitigate are located, so to speak, above and
certain extreme manifestations of social beyond the poor. The right which cor-
differentiation, so that the social struc-responds to the obligation of the State
ture may continue to be based on thisto provide assistance is not the right
differentiation. If assistance were to be of the poor, but rather the right of
based on the interests of the poor per- every citizen that the taxes he pays for
son, there would, in principle, be no the poor be of such a size and applied
limit whatsoever on the transmission in such a manner that the public
of property in favor of the poor, goals
a of assistance to the poor be
transmission that would lead to the truly attained. Consequently, in the
equality of all. But since the focus case of negligence in assistance to the
poor, it would not be the poor who
is the social whole-the political, fam-
are entitled to take action against the
ily, or other sociologically determined
circles-there is no reason to aid theState, but rather the other elements
person more than is required by the indirectly harmed by such negligence.
maintenance of the social status quo.In case it should be possible, for
When this purely social and cen- instance, to prove that a thief might
The Poor 123
asserts that the State out

not have carried must organizea ro
assistance to the poor
legal assistance in the interest
requested
been granted, it
of public prosperity. With would
this objec-
be the robbed one who would be en- tive, it creates legal public bodies
titled to claim compensation from the which are obligated to the State to
welfare administration. Assistance to assist needy individuals; but they are
the poor holds, in legal teleology, the not so obligated to the latter since
same position as the protection of ani- these have no legal claim.
mals. No one is punished in Germany This principle acquires an extreme
for torturing an animal, except if he character when the law imposes upon
does it "publicly or in a manner thatwell-to-do relatives of the poor an
results in scandal." It is not, therefore,
obligation of support. It would appear
consideration for the mistreated animalat first sight that in this case the poor
but rather for the witnesses that de- hold over their well-to-do relatives
termines punishment. a claim which the State merely secures
This exclusion of the poor, which and makes effective. The inner mean-
consists in denying them the status of ing is, however, a different one. The
a final end in the teleological chain political community cares for the poor
and, as we have seen, does not even for utilitarian reasons, and gets com-
permit them to stand there as a means, pensation from the relatives because
is also manifested in the fact that the cost of assistance would be exces-
within the modern relatively demo- sive, or so it considers it. The law does
not take into account any immediate
cratic State public assistance is perhaps
the only branch of the administration obligation of person to person, for
in which the interested parties haveexample
no between a wealthy brother
participation whatsoever. In the con- and a poor brother; this obligation is
ception to which we are referring, purely moral. The law is concerned
assistance to the poor is, in effect,only
an with serving the interests of the
application of public means to public community, and it does this in two
ends; and, since the poor find them- ways: by assisting the poor and by
selves excluded from its teleology-- collecting from relatives the cost of
something that is not the case for assistance. This is, in effect, the socio-
logical structure of the laws pertaining
the interested parties in other branches
of administration-it is logical thatto support. They do not simply purport
the principle of self-government, to give a legally binding form to moral
which is recognized to a varying
obligations. This is shown in facts
degree in other matters, should notlike
be the following. Undoubtedly, the
applied to the poor and to their moral
as- obligation of assistance between
sistance. When the State is obligated
brothers is a strong imperative. None-
theless, when in the first draft of the
by a law to channel a stream to provide
irrigation for certain districts, German
the Civil Code an attempt was
made to give it legal sanction, the ex-
stream is approximately in the situa-
tion of the poor supported by the planatory reasons acknowledged the
State: it is the object of obligation extraordinary harshness of such an
obligation, but stated that otherwise
but is not entitled to the corresponding
right, which is rather that of the the cost of public assistance would be
adjacent property holders. And every too high. This became manifest in
the fact that on occasions the legal
time that this centralist interest pre-
vails, the relationship between rightquota of maintenance exceeds any-
and obligation may be altered for the
thing that might be required from an
sake of utilitarian considerations. The individual and moral point of view.
projected Poor Law of 1842 in Prussia The German Imperial Court of Justice
124 SOCIAL PROBLEMS
sentenced an olddenceman toor give

to any action claim whatso-up all
his possessions-a few hundred
ever of the poor person. marks
-for the maintenance of a disabled The image of a channeled stream
son, although he argued on plausible
which we used previously was, how-
grounds that he too would be disabled
ever, inaccurate. For the poor are not
only poor, they are also citizens. As
and that this money was his sole re-
source. It is very doubtful that one
such, they participate in the rights
can speak in this case of a moral which the law grants to the totality
right on the part of the son. But such of citizens, in accordance with the ob-
a right does not concern the collec- ligation of the State to assist the poor.
To use the same image, let us say that
tivity; the only thing it asks is whether
it may have recourse to the relatives the poor are at the same time the
in order to impose upon them its stream and the adjacent landowner, in
the same sense as the wealthiest
obligation toward the poor, in ac-
cordance with the general norms. citizens could be. Undoubtedly, the
functions of the State, which formally
This internal meaning of the obliga-
stand at the same ideal distance from
tion to provide support is also sym-
bolized by the manner in which it is all citizens, have, insofar as content
is concerned, very different connota-
carried out in practice. First, the poor
tions, in accordance with the different
man at his request is assisted, and then
a search is made for a son or a father positions of citizens; and though the
who, eventually and in accordance poor participate in assistance, not as
with his economic situation, is sen- subjects with their own ends but
tenced to pay not the entire cost of merely as members of the teleological
assistance but perhaps one half or one organization of the State which tran-
third. The exclusively social meaning scends them, their role in that function
of the legal rule appears also in the of the State, however, is distinct from
fact that the obligation to provide that of well-to-do citizens.
maintenance, according to the German What matters sociologically is to
Civil Code, only occurs when it does understand that the special position
not "jeopardize" the "status-adequate which the assisted poor occupy does
maintenance" of the person so obli- not impede their incorporation into
gated. It is at least debatable whether the State as members of the total
in certain cases assistance is not morally political unit. This is so despite the
obligatory, even when it adds up to fact that their overall situation makes
the amounts mentioned above. But their individual condition the external
endpoint of a helping act and, on the
the collectivity, nonetheless, renounces
other hand, an inert object without
such demands in all cases, because the
downward mobility of an individual rights in the total goals of the State.
from his "status-adequate" position In spite of, or better yet, because of
would result in harm to the status these two characteristics which appear
structure of society which would ap- to place the poor outside the State, the
poor are ordered organically within the
pear to transcend in social importance
the material advantages derived from whole, belong as poor to the historical
forcing him to that contribution. reality of society which lives in them
Consequently, the obligation of assis-and above them, and constitute a
tance does not include a right of the formal sociological element, like the
civil servant or the taxpayer, the
poor person
relatives. vis-.-vis his
The obligation well-to-do
of assistance teacher or the intermediary in any
is no more than the general obligation interaction. The poor are approxi-
of the State, but transferred to the mately in the situation of the stranger
relatives and without any correspon- to the group who finds himself, so
The Poor 125
to speak, medieval form does their reaction to

materially outs
in which the donation
he resides.fall to any specificButindi-
this case vidual; but bytotal
a large rehabilitatingstruc
their
which comprises the
economic activity, by preserving their au
parts of the
bodily energy,group
by preventing their im- as
stranger; pulses from
and theleading them to the use
peculiar
between of violent meanscreate
them to enrich themselves, th
wider sense and characterize the truethe social collectivity gets from the
historical circle. Thus the poor arepoor a reaction to what it has done
located in a way outside the group;to them.
but this is no more than a peculiar A purely individual relationship is
mode of interaction which binds them sufficient from the ethical point of
into a unity with the whole in itsview and perfect from the sociological
widest sense. point of view only when each indi-
It is only with this conception thatvidual is an end for the other-al-
we resolve the sociological antinomythough naturally not merely an end.
of the poor, which reflects the ethical-But this cannot be applied to the ac-
social difficulties of assistance. The tions of a transpersonal collective
solipsist tendency of the medieval type entity. The teleology of the collec-
of almsgiving of which I spoke by- tivity may quietly pass by the individ-
passed internally, so to say, the poor ual and return to itself without resting
to whom the action was directed ex- on him. From the moment the indi-
ternally; in so doing, it neglected the vidual belongs to this whole he is
principle according to which man mustplaced thereby, from the beginning, at
never be treated exclusively as a meansthe final point of action and not, as
but always as an end. In principle, in the other case, outside of it. Al-
the one who receives alms also givesthough he is denied as individual the
something; there is a diffusion of ef-character of an end-in-itself, he par-
fects from him to the giver and this ticipates as member of the whole in
is precisely what converts the donationthe character of an end-in-itself which
into an interaction, into a sociologicalthe whole always possesses.
event. But if-as in the case pre- A long time before this centralist
viously cited-the recipient of almsconception of the essence of assistance
remains completely excluded from theto the poor became clear, its organic
teleological process of the giver, ifrole in the life of the collectivity was
the poor fulfill no role other thanrevealed through visible symbols. In
being an almsbox into which alms forold England, assistance to the poor
Masses are tossed, the interaction iswas exercised by monasteries and ec-
cut short and the donation ceases to clesiastical corporations, and the rea-
be a social fact in order to become a son for this, as has been duly noted,
purely individual fact. is that only the property of mortmain
As we were saying, neither does possesses the indispensable permanence
the modern conception of assistance on which assistance to the poor neces-
to the poor consider the poor as ends-sarily depends. The numerous secular
in-themselves; but nevertheless, ac- donations derived from booties and
cording to it, the poor, although theypenances did not suffice to attain this
are located in a teleological series
end, because they were not yet suf-
which bypasses them, are an elementficiently integrated into the adminis-
which belongs organically to the whole trative system of the State and they
and are-on the basis given-closelywere consumed without lasting results.
Assistance to the poor then became
related to the goals of the collectivity.
based on the only substantial and
Certainly neither now nor in the
126 SOCIAL PROBLEMS
fixed point in the

the poormidst of social
in the Confederation should
chaos and turmoil; and this con- receive a different treatment in one
nection is shown negatively by the
region than in another. If in England
external and technical reasons contrib-
indignation aroused by the clergy sent
uted
from Rome to England, because it to establish a link between as-
sistance to the poor and landed prop-
neglected assistance. The foreign priest
erty, this connection does not lose its
does not feel intimately related to the
life of the community; and the factprofound sociological meaning when
that he does not care for the poorthe addition of other branches of ad-
appears as the clearest sign of this
ministration to public assistance insti-
lack of connection. tutions led to the crossing of county
This same link of assistance with boundaries by the welfare associations
the firm substratum of social existence despite the technical disadvantages
appears clear in the later tie es- involved. It is precisely this contra-
tablished in England between the poor diction in the technical conditions
tax and landed property; and this was which makes the unity of sociological
cause as much as effect of the fact meaning even more conspicuous.
that the poor counted as an organic Consequently, the conception that
element of the land, belonging to defines
the assistance to the poor as an
land. The same tendency is manifested "organization of the propertied classes
in order to fulfill the sentiment of
in 1861, when part of the welfare
charges were legally transferred from moral duty which is associated with
the parish to the welfare association. property" is completely one-sided. As-
The costs of assistance to the poor sistance is rather a part of the orga-
were no longer to be carried in isola- nization of the whole, to which the
tion by parishes, but rather by a fund poor belong as well as the propertied
to which the parishes contributedclasses.
in It is certain that the technical
relation to the value of their landed and material characteristics of their
property. The proposition that in ordersocial position make them a mere
to make a distribution the number of object or crossing point of a superior
inhabitants should also be taken into collective life. But, in the final analy-
consideration was repeatedly and ex- sis, this is the role that each concrete
pressly rejected; with it, the individ-individual member of society per-
ualistic element was completely ex-forms; about which one can say, in
cluded. A suprapersonal entity, with accordance with the viewpoint tem-
its substratum in the objectivity of porarily accepted here, what Spinoza
landed property, and not a sum ofsays of God and the individual: that
persons, appeared as the carrier of we may love God, but that it would
the obligation to assist the poor. As- be contradictory that He, the whole
sistance in this case is so basic to the
which contains us, should love us, and
that the love which we dedicate to
social group that the local administra-
tion only gradually added to this mainHim is a part of the infinite love
activity, first the administration ofwith which God loves Himself. The
schools and roads, and then public singular exclusion to which the poor
health and the system of registration.are subjected on the part of the com-
Elsewhere, also, the welfare adminis- munity which assists them is charac-
tration has become a basis of political
teristic of the role which they fulfill
unity because of its success. The North
within society, as members of it in a
German Confederation decided that in special situation. If technically they
all of the territory of the Confedera- are mere objects, in turn in a wider
tion no needy person should remain sociological sense they are subjects who,
without assistance and that none of on the one hand, like all the others,
The Poor 127
constitute social
to oppose reali
establishment of residence
other hand,
on the part like all
of undesirable elements, th
located one can no longer demand
beyond the of the com-
abst
personal munity a solidaryof
unity give-and-take rela-
societ
Owing to tionship
this also
with the individual. it
Only for i
structurepractical
of reasons,
the and then only
grou as
the organs of the State-thus
question: Where read the d
long? If they
explanatory reasonsstill
of the legislationexe
nomic -do the municipalities
activity at have the
all,obli- t
the segmentgation to take
of over the care of the gen
the
that includes poor. them. If
bers of a This is, then, the extreme condition the
church,
insofar as it does not coincide with which the formal position of the poor
another group. If they are members hasof attained, a condition in which
their dependence on the general level
a family, they belong to the personally
of social evolution is revealed. The
and spatially defined circle of their
poor belong to the largest effective
relatives. But if they are no more than
circle. No part of the totality but the
poor, where do they belong ? A society
maintained or organized on the basistotality itself, to the extent that it
of tribal consciousness includes the constitutes a unit, is the place or
power to which the poor as poor are
poor within the circle of their tribe.
Other societies, whose ethical con-
linked. It is only for this circle, which,
nections are fulfilled essentially
being the largest, has no other outside
through the Church, will turn the poor it to which to transfer an obligation,
over to one or another type of piousthat a problem pointed out by the
associations, which are the answer of practitioners of welfare in the small
the society to the fact of poverty. The corporative entities ceases to exist: the
explanatory reasons of the German fact that they frequently avoid giving
law of 1871 on place of residence for assistance to the poor, for fear that
assistance answer this question in the once they have taken care of them
following manner: the poor belong to they will always have them on their
that community-that is, that com- hands. We see manifested here a very
munity is obligated to assist them-- important characteristic for human
which utilized their economic strength sociation, a trait which might be called
before their impoverishment. The prin- moral induction: when an act of as-
ciple just mentioned is a manifestation sistance has been performed, of what-
of the social structure which existed ever type, although it be spontaneous
prior to the complete triumph of the and individual and not demanded by
idea of the modern State, since the any obligation, there is a duty to con-
municipality is the place which enjoyed tinue it, a duty which is not only a
the economic fruits of those who are claim on the part of the one who re-
now impoverished. But the modernceives the assistance but also a senti-
mobility, the interlocal exchange ofment on the part of the one who gives.
all forces, have eliminated this limi- It is a very common experience that the
tation; so that the whole State must bebeggars to whom alms are given with
considered the terminus a quo and regularity consider these very rapidly
ad quem of all prestations. If the lawsas their right and as the duty of the
actually permit everybody to establishgiver, and if the latter fails in this
his residence in whatever community supposed obligation they interpret it
he wishes, then the community no as a denial of their due contribution
longer has an integrated relationship and feel a bitterness which they would
with its inhabitants. If there is no rightnot feel against someone who always
128 SOCIAL PROBLEMS
denied them alms. There is also the that determines it in the same way as
person in better circumstancesitwho
determines any other future process.
has supported for some time a needy There must be, therefore, a moral
person, fixing in advance the periodinstinct which tells us that the first act
for which he will do so, and who, of charity already corresponded to an
however, when he stops his gifts, is obligation which also demands the
second no less than the first action.
left with a painful feeling, as if he
were guilty. With full consciousness,This is clearly related to the motives
this fact is recognized by a Talmudicwhich we touched on at the beginning
law of the ritual code "Jore Deah": he
of this study. If, in the final analysis,
who has assisted three times a poor
any altruism, any good action, any
person with the same amount, al-self-sacrifice, is nothing but a duty
though he had in no way the intention and an obligation, this principle may,
of continuing the assistance, tacitly in the individual case, be manifested
acquires the obligation of continuingin such a form that any act of assist-
it; his act assumes the character of aance is, in its profound sense-if one
vow, from which only weighty rea- wishes, from the viewpoint of a meta-
sons can dispense him, such as, for physics of ethics-the mere fulfill-
example, his own impoverishment. ment of a duty which, naturally, is
The case just mentioned is much not exhausted with the first action
more complicated than the related but rather continues to exist as long
principle, homologous to odisse quemas the determining occasion obtains.
According to this, assistance given to
laeseris, which says that one loves the
one to whom he has done good. It is someone would be the ratio cognos-
understandable that one projects the cendi, the sign which makes us see
satisfaction of his own good action that one of the ideal lines of obli-
on the one who has given him thegation between man and man runs
opportunity for it: in the love for the
here and reveals its timeless aspect in
one for whom he has made sacrifices the continuing effects of the bond
established.
he loves in essence himself, just as in
the hate against the one to whom he We have seen so far two forms of
the relation between right and obli-
has done an injustice he hates himself.
The sense of obligation that the goodgation: the poor have a right to assist-
action leaves in the doer of good, that
ance; and there exists an obligation to
assist them, an obligation which is
particular form of noblesse oblige,
cannot be explained with so simple a not oriented toward the poor as having
psychology. I believe that, in effect,a right, but toward society to whose
preservation this obligation contributes
an a priori condition is involved here:
that each action of this type-despite and which the society demands from
its apparent free will, despite its ap-
its organs or from certain groups. But
parent character of opus supereroga- along with these two forms there exists
tionis-derives from an obligation; a third, which probably dominates the
that in such behavior a profound obli-moral consciousness: the collectivity
gation is implicit which, in a certainand well-to-do persons have the ob-
ligation to assist the poor, and this
way, is manifested and made visible
through action. What happens here obligation
is has its sufficient goal in
the same as in scientific induction: if the alleviation of the situation of the
the similarity is accepted between poor;
a to this there corresponds a right
past process and a future one, it isof the poor, as the correlative end of
not simply because the first one hasthe purely moral relation between the
this or that structure, but because a law
needy and the well-to-do. If I am not
mistaken, the emphasis has shifted
can be derived from the first process
The Poor 129
within this relation since the 18th

has given at all times to the obligation
of assisting the poor a specific local
century. The ideal of humanitarianism
and of the rights of man, mostly character.
in Rather, to centralize it in
England, displaced the centralist the largest circle and thereby to bring
spirit
of the Elizabethan Poor Law, accord-
it about not by immediate visibility
but only through the general concept
ing to which work had to be provided
for the poor for the benefit of of poverty-this
the is one of the longest
roads which sociological forms have
community. The ideal of humani-
had to travel to pass from the im-
tarianism substituted for this principle
mediate
another one: every poor person has sensate form to the abstract.
a right to minimal subsistence, whether When this change occurred, whereby
he wants and is able to work or not. assistance to the poor became an ab-
On the other hand, modern assistance,stract obligation of the State-in Eng-
in the correlation between moral dutyland in 1834, in Germany since the
(of the giver) and moral right (ofmiddle of the 19th century--its char-
the recipient) prefers to emphasize acter was modified with respect to this
the former. Evidently, this form is centralizing form. Above all, the State
maintains in the municipality the obli-
realized above all by private assistance,
in contrast to public assistance. We gation to participate in assistance, but
are attempting now to determine itsconsiders the municipality as its dele-
sociological significance in this sense.gate; local organization has been made
First, we should point out here theinto a mere technique in order to attain
already noted tendency to consider the best result possible; the municipality
assistance to the poor as a matter is no longer the point of departure,
pertaining to the widest political circle but rather a point of transmission in
(the State), while initially it was basedthe process of assistance. For this rea-
everywhere in the local community. son welfare associations are organized
This ascription of assistance to the everywhere according to principles of
smallest circle was, first of all, a conse-utility-for example, in England, they
quence of the corporative ties thatare organized in such a fashion that
bound the community. As long as the each of them may support a workhouse
supraindividual organism around and -and they have the deliberate tend-
above the individual had not changedency to avoid the partiality of local
influences. The growing employment
from the municipality to the State and
freedom of mobility had not com-of salaried welfare officials works in
pleted this process factually and psy-the same way. These officials stand
chologically, it was the most natural vis-a-vis the poor much more clearly
thing in the world for neighbors to as representatives of the collectivity
assist needy persons. To this may be from which they receive a salary than
added an extremely important cir-do the unpaid officials who work, so to
cumstance for the sociology of thespeak, more as human beings and
poor: that of all the social claims of aattend not so much to the merely
non-individualistic character based on objective point of view as to the
human, man-to-man point of view.
a general quality, it is that of the poor
which most impresses us. Laying aside Finally, a sociologically very important
acute stimuli, such as accidents or division of functions takes place. The
sexual provocations, there is nothing fact that assistance to the poor is still
such as misery that acts with suchessentially delegated to the municipali-
impersonality, such indifference, withties is especially useful for two reasons;
regard to the other qualities of thefirst, because every case must be
object and, at the same time, with suchhandled individually, something that
an immediate and effective force. This can only be done by someone close at
130 SOCIAL PROBLEMS
hand and with intimate self to be movedknowledge of

by an impetus of over-
the milieu, and second because
powering generosity; ifthe
but when the
will
municipality has of to each individualassistance
grant is not directly it
also has to provide known,
the but has to be inferred
money, by means it
since
might otherwise hand of representatives,
out the it must be assumedof
funds
the State too freely. that no
On one the
wants to spend more
other than
hand,
there are cases of need in which bu- the strictly necessary. This is not, of
course, an unshakable logical neces-
reaucratic handling is not a threat,
since action can be determined on sity-for the contrary thesis would not
the basis of objective criteria: sick-
constitute a logical contradiction-but
ness, blindness, deaf-mutism, insanity,it corresponds to a psychological
chronic illness. In these cases, assistance
dogma which, by the enormous num-
has a more technical character and ber of its empirical confirmations, has
consequently the State, or the larger acquired the practical value of the
institution, is much more efficient. Its demonstrable.
logically
greater abundance of means and its cen- Mass action has the character of a
tralized administration show their ad- minimum, owing to its need to reach
vantages in those cases where personalthe lowest level of the intellectual,
and local circumstances have little economic, cultural, aesthetic, etc. scale.
importance. And aside from the quali- The law which is valid for all has
been designated as the ethical mini-
tative determination of the direct presta-
mum; the logic which is valid for
tions of the State, there is the quantita-
all is the intellectual minimum; the
tive determination that particularly
"right to work," postulated for all,
differentiates public from private assist-
can only be extended to those whose
ance: the State and, in general, public
organizations attend only to the quality
most represents a minimum; affilia-
urgent and immediate needs. Every-tion to a party in principle demands
where, and particularly in England,
that one accept the minimum of beliefs
without which it would not exist.
assistance is guided by the firm prin-
This type of social minimum is per-
ciple that only the minimum necessary
fectly expressed in the negative charac-
for the life of the poor should leave
the purse of taxpayers. ter of collective processes and in-
terests.1
All this is intimately related to the
character of collective actions in gen-
Consequently, the fact that the pres-
tation
eral. A collectivity which comprises theof the total community in favor
of the poor is limited to a minimum
energies or interests of many individu-
als can only take into account istheir
entirely in accordance with the
typical character of collective actions.
peculiarities, when there is a structure
with a division of labor whose mem- The motive for this-that such an ac-
tion has as its basis only that which
bers are assigned different functions.
can abe assumed with certitude in each
But when it is necessary to perform
individual-is also the second reason
united action, whether through a direct
organ or a representative organ,for this behavior: the fact that assist-
the
ance to the poor, limited to a mini-
content of this action can only include
that minimum of the personal spheremum, has an objective character. It is
that coincides with everybody else's.1 It
There is a digression here on the nega-
follows, in the first place, that when
tive character of collective behavior which
expenses are incurred in the namemakes
of no specific reference to poverty. It
has been translated by Kurt H. Wolff in
the collectivity, no more may be spent
The Sociology of Georg Simmel (New
than what the most thrifty of its mem-
York: The Free Press, 1964 [paperback
bers would spend. A community which
edition; 1st edition, 1950]), pp. 396-401.
is acting closely together may allow it-
[Translator's note.]
The Poor 131
possible to mative
determine obje
measure, whose logical applica-
fair accuracy
tion implies
whatobjectivity, isis
derived
nece
not
a man from physical
only from the poor but also frombrea
the
that exceedsinterest of the State. minimum
this We see mani-
ance aimed fested
at here a an essential sociological r
positive
formclear
requires less of the relationship between the
criteria
on subjective
individual judgments
and the totality. Wherever
and quality.prestations
I orsaidinterventions are trans-
befor
erred from not-very-d
of subjectively individuals to society, reg-
need, and, ulation
therefore,
by the latter tends to be con- no
subjective cerned either with an excess or with
evaluation, ar
best adapted a deficiency
to in individual
State action. In
ass
ticularly cases compulsoryof education the State re-
illness a
infirmity-while those
quires that the individual should not w
more individual character are better learn too little, but leaves it up to
assigned to the narrower local com-him whether to learn more or even
munity. This objective determinability"too much." With the legal work-
of the need, which favors the interven-day, the State provides that the em-
tion of the widest group, is presentployer should not require too much
when assistance is limited to the mini- from his workers, but leaves it up to
mum. We see here again the old him whether to ask for less. Thus this
epistemological correlation betweenregulation always refers only to one
universality and objectivity. In the side of the action, while the other
field of knowledge, real universality, side is left to the freedom of the indi-
the acknowledgment of a proposition vidual. This is the scheme within
by the totality of minds-not his- which our socially controlled actions
torical-real, but ideal-is an aspectappear; they are limited only in one
or expression of the objectivity of thisof their dimensions; society, on the
proposition; on the other hand, there one side, sets limits to their excess
may be another proposition which is, or deficiency, while on the other side
for one or many individuals, absolutelytheir deficiency or excess is left to the
certain and possesses the full signifi- indefiniteness of subjective choice. But
cance of truth, but lacks this special this scheme sometimes deceives us;
stamp which we call objectivity. Thus, there are cases in which social regula-
in practice, one can only in principle tion includes in fact both sides, al-
request a prestation from the totalitythough practical interest only focuses
on an absolutely objective basis. Whenattention on one side and overlooks
the basis is to be judged only subjec- the other. Wherever, for example, the
tively and there is no possibility of a private punishment of a crime has
purely objective determination, the de-been transferred to society and objec-
mand may be no less pressing and its tive criminal law, one only takes into
fulfillment no less valuable, but it account, as a rule, that thereby one
will be directed only toward individ- acquires greater certainty in retribu-
uals; the fact that it refers to purely tion, that is, a sufficient degree and
individual circumstances requires cor- certitude in its application. But, in
respondingly that it be fulfilled byreality, the goal pursued is not only
mere individuals. to punish enough, but also not to
If the objective point of view goes punish too much. Society not only
hand in hand with the tendency toprotects the person who has suffered
turn over all assistance to the State-a damage, but also the criminal against
tendency which certainly until now has the excess of subjective reaction; that
nowhere been fully realized-the nor-is to say, society establishes as an ob-
132 SOCIAL PROBLEMS
jective measure subject but from the interest of the

of punishment that
which corresponds collectivity-is
to its directed
social against that
interest
and not to the desires or interests of danger of excess.
the victim. And this occurs not only The transcendence of the subjective
in relations which are legally es- point of view is as valid for the re-
tablished. Any social class which is not
cipient as for the giver. English public
too low sees to it that its members assistance, by intervening only when
spend a minimum on their clothing; there is an objectively determined
establishes a standard of "decent" absolute lack of means, renounces the
dress; and the one who does not investigation
attain as to whether a person
this standard will no longer belong deserves
to assistance. This is so because
that class. But it also establishes a
the workhouse is such an unpleasant
limit at the other extreme, although
experience that no one, except in ex-
not with the same determination nor treme need, would choose it, and
consequently the lack of means is
in such a conscious manner; a certain
measure of luxury and elegance and objectively determined. For this rea-
son its complement is private assist-
even at times modernity is not proper,
indeed, for this or that group, and ance, which is directed to a specific
he who overreaches this upper limit worthy individual and which can select
individually, since the State already
is treated on occasion as not belonging
fully to the group. Thus the group cares for the most urgent needs. The
does not allow the freedom of the task of private assistance consists in
individual to expand completely in
rehabilitating the poor, who are al-
this second direction, but rather ready
it sets
protected from starvation, and
an objective limit to his subjectivein curing need, for which the State
choice, that is to say, a limit required
offers only a temporary alleviation. It
is not need as such, the terminus a
by supraindividual life conditions.
This fundamental form is repeated
quo, that determines the task of private
whenever the community takesassistance,
over but rather the ideal of
assistance to the poor. While ap- independent and economically
creating
productive individuals. The State
parently it seems to have an interest
only in setting a lower limit operates
to as- in a causal sense, private as-
sistance, that is, in seeing to it that in a teleological sense. To put
sistance
it in to
the poor should receive the part other words: the State assists
which they are entitled-in other
poverty; private assistance assists the
words, that they should not receive
poor. A sociological difference of the
too little--there is also the other greatest
con- importance becomes manifest
sideration: that the poor should not
here. Abstract concepts, which crystal-
receive too much. This latter con- lize certain elements of a complex in-
dividual reality, often acquire life and
sideration is in practice less significant.
The disadvantage of private assistance consequences for practice which would
lies not only in the "too little," butto fit only the concrete totality
appear
also in the "too much," which leads of the phenomenon. This may be
to laziness, uses the available means in seen in very intimate relationships.
an economically unproductive way, and The meaning of certain erotic rela-
arbitrarily favors some at the expense tionships cannot be understood in any
of others. The subjective impulse to other way than that one of the parties
do good sins in both directions and, seeks not the beloved, but love, often
although the danger of excess is not with notable indifference toward the
as great as that of deficiency, an ob- individuality of the lover. This is so
jective norm-which determines a because what is wished by this person
standard that is not derived from the is to receive that emotional value-
The Poor 133
love-in the case will

and by have to beitself.
taken into
account it
relationships to the often
same extent as theseem
gen-
only eral fact thing
essential of the crime. is that
exist a certain kind and a certain This twofold attitude may also be
quantity of religiosity, while itsadopted
car- with respect to poverty. It is
riers are indifferent; the behavior of to start from poverty as an
necessary
the priest or the relation of the objectively
faith- determined phenomenon
ful to the community is determinedand to attempt to eliminate it as such.
only by this general consideration,
Whoever the poor may be and what-
without taking into account theeverpar-the individual causes that produce
ticular motives which produce andthe individual consequences it
it and
color this sentiment in the individual. produces, poverty requires assistance,
In this case there is no particular compensation for this social deficiency.
interest in those individuals, since But, on the other hand, interest may
they only matter as carriers of that be directed to the poor person, who is
impersonal fact or rather they do notassisted unquestionably because he is
matter at all. In the social and ethical poor, not for the purpose of eliminat-
perspective there is a rationalism ing poverty in general pro rata, but
which demands that the interaction rather to help this particular poor per-
of people should be based on absolute son. His poverty operates here as an
subjective truthfulness. Everyone may individual and specific characteristic;
require the truth as an objective qualityit serves as the immediate occasion for
of any statement made to him, without being concerned with him; but the
taking into consideration the particular individual as a whole should be put
circumstances or special qualifications into such a situation that poverty
of the statement; there can be nowould disappear by itself. For this
reason assistance derived from the first
right to truth modified in an indi-
attitude is directed more to the fact
vidual way by those qualifications or
circumstances. The truth, and not the
of poverty; and assistance derived
from the second attitude, on the other
speaker or the listener in their indi-
hand, to its cause. Incidentally, it is
viduality, is the assumption, content,
and value of group interaction. The of sociological importance to observe
same problem is also the basis that
of the natural distribution of the two
divergences among criminologists. types
Is of assistance between the State
and private individuals is modified
the punishment directed at the crime
or at the criminal? An abstract objec-
as soon as one follows up the causal
tivism demands punishment becausechain
a one step further. The State-in
crime has occurred which requires a
England more clearly than elsewhere
reinstatement of the violated real or
-meets externally visible need; pri-
ideal order. It demands punishmentvate assistance attends to its individ-
based on the logic of ethics, as aual causes. But the fundamental eco-
consequence of the impersonal fact ofnomic and cultural circumstances
the crime. But, from another pointwhich create those personal conditions
of view, only the guilty subject should can only be changed by the collectivity.
be punished; the reaction of punish-The task of changing those circum-
ment results not because the crime has stances in such a way that they should
occurred as something objective, but offer the least chance for impoverish-
because a subject who expressed him- ment due to individual weakness, un-
self in the criminal act requires ex-favorable propensities, misfortune, or
piation, education, and control. Formistakes belongs to the collectivity.
these reasons, in the degree of punish-Here, as in many other respects, the
ment, the individual circumstances ofcollectivity, its circumstances, interests,
134 SOCIAL PROBLEMS
and actions, surrounds supraindividual

and affects the
community; once this
individual in his specificity. The
has happened, col-compensations,
constant
substitutions,
lectivity represents a kind and changes in priority
of immediate
reality to which the result
elements con-
between both types of social
tribute their own existence, the Should
arrangements. results this tension or
of their own life. But, on
social the other
disharmony which is manifested
hand, it is also the ground inpoverty
as individual which be directly re-
individual life grows, a ground
solved in
among the elements of society
which it grows in such a way
or through that
the unity formed by all the
the diversity of individual elements? This is a question which
proclivities
and situations contributes an endless has to be decided in a formally similar
variety of unique and colorful mani- way for every aspect of society, even
festations to that overall reality.2 though it is only rarely posed with
The principle that governs assist-such clarity and purity as here. This
ance to the poor in England and whichis mentioned here only so that we
led us to these generalizations is theshould not forget to what extent "pri-
direct opposite of the French one. In vate" assistance is also a social phe-
France, assistance to the poor is in-nomenon, a sociological form, which
cumbent upon private associations andno less definitely attributes to the poor
persons, and the State only intervenesa position as organic members of group
when these are insufficient. This in- life-something that may escape su-
version naturally does not mean that perficial observation. This fact acquires
in France private persons would take particular clarity by virtue of the tran-
care of the most pressing needs (like sitional forms between both levels:
the State in England), while the State on the one hand, the poor tax, and, on
would handle what exceeds this mini- the other, the legal obligation of as-
mum and is individually desirable sistance to poor relatives. As long as
(like private persons in England). a special poor tax exists, the relation-
What the French principle actually ship between the collectivity and the
implies is that the two levels of assist- poor does not have the abstract purity
ance cannot, insofar as content is con- which places the poor in a direct rela-
cerned, be separated as clearly and tionship with the whole as an indi-
fundamentally as in England. For this visible unity; the State is only the in-
reason, in practice, the condition of the termediary that channels the no longer
poor will frequently be the same in voluntary individual contributions to
both countries. But it is obvious that their beneficiaries. As soon as the poor
in terms of sociological principlestax becomes part of the general tax
there is a fundamental difference. We obligation and the resources of assist-
are dealing here with a particular case ance are drawn from the general in-
of the larger process, by virtue ofcome of the State or municipality, this
which the direct interaction which ob- relationship between the total com-
tains among the elements of the group munity and the poor has reached its
becomes an action of the unitary and full development; assistance to the
poor becomes a function of the totality
2 Simmel uses a footnote to expound his
as such, and not of the sum of individ-
basic conception of the relationship between
uals, as in the case of the poor tax.
the individual and the social, without any
When the law requires the assistance
specific reference to the topic at hand. Since
this footnote states in metaphorical andof needy relatives, the interest of the
highly abstract terms ideas much better
totality is expressed in even more spe-
presented at length in his basic theoretical
cialized terms. Private assistance,
writings, we decided to leave it out. [Trans-
lator's note.] which in all other cases is also affected
The Poor 135
by the structure
plain, is a completelyand teleo
elementary soci-
ological
collectivity, fact.
here in a con
emphasis is We have already seen this in such by
dominated
simple structures
We said above that as marriage. Each of
the re
between the the spouses, in certain situations, sees
collectivity a
contributes the
tomarriagetheas an independent
formati struc-
in a formal sense as much as the rela- ture distinct from himself, confronting
tionship between the collectivity andhim with duties and expectations, good
the civil servant or the taxpayer. Wethings and bad, which proceed not
are going to develop this assertionfrom the other spouse as a person, but
from the point of view which we have from the whole, that makes each of its
just reached in our discussion. Weparts an object, in spite of the fact that
compared above the poor person withthe whole consists only of these parts.
the stranger, who also finds himselfThis relationship, this fact of finding
confronted by the group. But thisoneself simultaneously within and
"being confronted" implies a specificwithout, becomes more and more com-
relationship which draws the strangerplicated and more and more visible as
into group life as an element of it.the number of members of the group
Thus the poor person stands undoubt-increases. And this is true not only be-
edly outside the group, inasmuch as he cause the whole then acquires an inde-
is a mere object of the actions of thependence that dominates the individ-
collectivity; but being outside, in thisual, but because the most marked
case, is only, to put it briefly, a par-differentiations among individuals lead
ticular form of being inside. All thisto a whole scale of nuances in this two-
occurs in society in the same way as,fold relationship. The group has a spe-
in the Kantian analysis, spatial sep-
cial and different relationship with
arateness occurs in consciousness: even
respect to the prince and the banker,
though in space everything is separatethe society woman and the priest, the
and the subject, too, as perceiver, isartist and the civil servant. On the one
outside of the other things, the space hand, it makes the person into an ob-
itself is "in me," in the subject, in the
ject, it "handles" him differently, it
wider sense. If we consider thingssubjects him or recognizes him as a
more closely, this twofold position of power standing against power. On the
the poor--as well as that of theother hand, the group incorporates him
stranger-can be found in all elementsas an element of its life, as a part of
of the group with mere variations ofthe whole, which in turn stands in con-
degree. However much an individual trast to other elements. This is perhaps
may contribute positively to group life,a completely unitary attitude of social
however much his personal life may reality, which manifests itself separately
be tied with social life and submergedin these two directions or which ap-
pears different from these two distinct
in it, he also stands vis-A-vis that total-
ity: giving or receiving, treated well or viewpoints: comparably, a particular
poorly by it, feeling inwardly or only
representation stands with respect to
the soul, so distinct from it that it can
outwardly committed to it; in short, as
part or as object in relation to thebe influenced by the total mood-
social group as subject, to which he
colored, heightened or toned down,
nevertheless belongs as a member, asformed or dissolved-while at the
a part-subject, through the very rela- same time it is still an integral part of
tionships based on his actions andthat whole, an element of the soul, of
circumstances. This twofold position,that soul which consists only of the co-
which appears logically difficult to ex-
existence and interlocking of such rep-
136 SOCIAL PROBLEMS
resentations. In that scale of relation- a lower class, because the means they
ships with the collectivity the poor
have would be sufficient to satisfy the
occupy a well-defined position. Assist- typical ends of that class. Undoubtedly,
ance, to which the community is com- it may happen that a man who is
mitted in its own interest, but which really poor does not suffer from
the poor person in the large majoritythe of discrepancy between his means and
cases has no right to claim, makes the needs of his class, so that poverty
poor person into an object of the activ- in the psychological sense does not
ity of the group and places him at a for him; just as it may also hap-
exist
distance from the whole, which at pen that a wealthy man sets him-
times makes him live as a corpus vile self goals higher than the desires
by the mercy of the whole and at times, proper to his class and his means, so
because of this, makes him into its that he feels psychologically poor. It
bitter enemy. The State expresses this may be, therefore, that individual pov-
by depriving those who receive public erty-insufficiency of means for the
alms of certain civic rights. This sep- ends of a person-does not exist for
aration, however, is not absolute ex- someone, while social poverty exists;
clusion, but a very specific relationship and it may be, on the other hand,
with the whole, which would be dif- that a man is individually poor while
ferent without this element. The col- socially wealthy. The relativity of pov-
lectivity, of which the poor person erty does not refer to the relation be-
is a part, enters into a relationship tween individual means and actual in-
with him, confronting him, treating dividual ends, but to the status-related
him as an object. ends of the individual, to a social a
These norms, however, do not ap- priori which varies from status to
pear to be applicable to the poor in status. The relationship between indi-
general but only to some of them, vidual means and actual ends, on the
those who receive assistance, while other hand, is something absolute, in-
there are poor who do not receive dependent in its basic meaning from
assistance. This leads us to consider anything outside of the individual. It
the relative character of the conceptisof a very significant socio-historical dif-
poverty. He is poor whose means are ference which level of needs each
not sufficient to attain his ends. This group considers as a zero point above
concept, which is purely individual- which or below which wealth or pov-
istic, is narrowed down in its practicalerty begins. In a somewhat complex
application in the sense that certain civilization there is always a margin,
ends may be considered as independent often a considerable one, to determine
of any arbitrary and purely personal this level. In relation to this problem
decision. First, the ends which nature there are many important sociological
imposes: food, clothing, shelter. But differences; for example: the relation-
one cannot determine with certainty ship of this zero point to the real
the level of these needs, a level that average; whether it is necessary to
would be valid in all circumstances belong to the favored minority in
and everywhere and below which, con- order not to be considered poor or
sequently, poverty exists in an absolutewhether a class, out of an instinctive
sense. Rather, each milieu, each social utilitarian criterion to prevent the
class has typical needs; the impossibil-growth of feelings of poverty, sets
ity of satisfying them means poverty. the boundary below which poverty
From this derives the banal fact that begins very low; or whether an indi-
in all advanced civilizations there are vidual case can modify the boundary,
persons who are poor within their as for example the moving into a small
town
class and would not be poor within or into a closed social circle of
The Poor 137
a wealthy sociological person; or

situations, because here the wh
group holdsintention onandrigidly position of the giver and
to t
set between of the recipient areand
rich combined inpoor
the
A result of most varied ways with all their indi- be
poverty's
within all social strata, which have vidual nuances.
created a typical level of needs for Of the many categories which make
each individual, is that often poverty is possible, so to speak, a systematic
not susceptible to assistance. However, ordering of these phenomena, the most
the principle of assistance is more ex- important for the problem of poverty
tensive than what its official mani- seem to be the following basic alterna-
festations would indicate. When, for tives. On the one hand, does the mean-
ing and purpose of the gift consist
example, within a large family the
poorer and richer members give onein the final condition achieved by it,
another presents, the latter take in
ad-the fact that the recipient will have
a valuable specific object, or, on the
vantage of a good opportunity to give
the former a value which exceeds the other hand, does it consist in the action
value of what they have received; and
itself, in the gift as the expression of
not only that, but also the quality the
of giver's intention, of a love desirous
presents reveals this character of as-
of sacrifice, or of a reaching out of the
sistance: useful objects are givenself
to which is manifested more or less
the poorer relatives, that is, objects
arbitrarily by the gift? In the latter
which help them to maintain them- case, the process of giving is, so to
selves within the level of their class.
say, its own ultimate end and the ques-
tion of wealth or poverty evidently
For this reason, presents from a soci-
ological point of view turn out to plays
be no role whatever, except in
completely different in the various terms of the practical problem of what
social classes. The sociology of the gift
people can afford. But when the one
to whom one gives is a poor man, the
coincides in part with that of poverty.
In the gift it is possible to discover a
emphasis is not on the process but on
its results: the main thing is that the
very extensive scale of reciprocal rela-
tionships between men, differences poor
in person receive something. Be-
the content, motivation, and mannertween
of these two extremes of the con-
giving as well as in that of accepting cept of gift there are innumerable
the gift. Gift, theft, and exchangemixed are forms. The more the latter type
the external forms of interaction which predominates in its purest form, the
are directly linked with the question more impossible it often is to give
of ownership and from which an end- the poor person what he lacks in the
less wealth of psychological phenom- form of a gift, because the other
ena that determine the sociological sociological relationships between indi-
process are derived. They correspond viduals are incongruent with that of
to the three motives of action: altru- giving. The gift is almost always pos-
ism, egoism, and objective norms; the sible when a great social distance
essence of exchange is in the substi-
intervenes or when a great personal
tution of some values by others which intimacy prevails; but it becomes diffi-
cult to the extent that social distance
are objectively equal, while subjective
motives of goodness or greed are elim-decreases or personal distance in-
inated since in the pure concept of creases. In the upper classes, the tragic
exchange the value of the object is not
situation frequently occurs in which
measured by the desire of the individ-the needy person would willingly ac-
ual but by the value of the other ob- cept assistance and he who is in a
well-to-do position would also will-
ject. Of these three forms, gift is that
which offers the greatest wealth of
ingly grant it; but neither can the
138 SOCIAL PROBLEMS
former ask for it nor the latter offer his action; his subjective intention is
it. In the higher classes the economic considered valuable only insofar as
a priori, below which poverty begins, it normally produces a certain socially
is set in such a way that this povertyuseful effect. Thus too, frequently,
very rarely occurs and is even excludedthe concept of personality is not de-
in principle. The acceptance of as- fined by an inner characteristic that
sistance thus excludes the assisted qualifies the individual for a specific
person from the premises of his role, but, on the contrary, those
social
status and provides visible proof elements
that of society that perform a
specific role are called personalities.
the poor person is formally dclasse.
Theisindividual state, in itself, no
Until this happens, class prejudice
strong enough to make poverty, longer
so determines the concept, but
to say, invisible; and until then
social teleology does so; the individ-
poverty is individual suffering, with-
ual is determined by the way in which
out social consequences. All the as-totality that surrounds him acts
the
sumptions on which the life oftoward
the him. Where this occurs, we
upper classes is based determine find
that a certain continuation of modern
idealism, which does not attempt to
a person may be poor in an individual
sense, that is, that his resources define
may things by an essence inherent
be insufficient for the needs of his to them, but by the reactions that
class, without his having to recur to occur in the subject with respect to
assistance. For this reason, no one is them. The binding function which the
socially poor until he has been assisted.poor person performs within an ex-
And this has a general validity: soci- isting society is not generated by the
ologically speaking, poverty does not sole fact of being poor; only when
come first and then assistance-this society--the totality or particular in-
is rather fate in its personal form-- dividuals-reacts toward him with as-
sistance, only then does he play his
but a person is called poor who re-
ceives assistance or should receive it specific social role.
given his sociological situation, al- This social meaning of the "poor
though perchance he may not receiveman," in contrast to the individual
it. meaning, makes the poor into a kind
The social-democratic assertion that of estate or unitary stratum within
the modern proletarian is definitely society. The fact that someone is poor
poor but not a poor man fits this inter- does not mean that he belongs to the
pretation. The poor, as a sociological specific social category of the "poor."
category, are not those who suffer He may be a poor shopkeeper, artist,
specific deficiencies and deprivations, or employee but he remains in this
but those who receive assistance or category, which is defined by a specific
should receive it according to social activity or position. In this category
he may occupy, as a consequence of
norms. Consequently, in this sense,
poverty cannot be defined in itself hisaspoverty, a gradually modified posi-
tion; but the individuals who, in
a quantitative state, but only in terms
of the social reaction resulting fromdifferent statuses and occupations, are
a specific situation; it is analogousin
tothis state are not grouped in any
way into a particular sociological
the way crime, the substantive defini-
whole different from the social stratum
tion of which offers such difficulties,
is defined as "an action punishedtoby which they belong. It is only from
public sanctions." Thus today some the moment they are assisted-perhaps
do not determine the essence of mo- already when their total situation
would normally require assistance,
rality on the basis of the inner state
of the subject but from the resulteven of though it has not yet been given
The Poor 139
-that need information

they become about some obscure par
character. by
characterized Such a specification
poverty of
does not remain united
poverty, as the lack of shelter implies,
tion among is necessary
itstoday to contribute an
members
element of association. Moreover,
collective attitude which one
whole adoptsmay note that the increase of general
toward it
prosperity, the greater police
explicit tendency vigilance
toward
not alwaysand,been
above all, social conscience
lacking. which,
with a strangefor
14th century, mixture of good
exampand
in bad motives,
Norwich "cannot tolerate" the
a Poorman'
Germany the so-called
sight of poverty, all contribute to im- "
miserable."pose Some time
on poverty increasingly the tend- la
ency to hide. And
in the Italian this tendency to a
cities p
hide logically
wealthy, of the isolates the poor in-
Optim
called themselves, whose members creasingly from one another and pre-
were united only by the fact of theirvents them from developing any feel-
wealth. Similar unions of the poor ing of belonging to a stratum, as was
soon became impossible because, with possible in the Middle Ages.
the growing differentiation of society, The class of the poor, especially in
the individual differences in education modern society, is a unique socio-
and ideas, in interests and background,logical synthesis. It possesses a great
among those who might have belongedhomogeneity insofar as its meaning
to the unions were too great to lend toand location in the social body is con-
such groups the necessary strength forcerned; but it lacks it completely
true sociation. insofar as the individual qualification
It is only when poverty implies aof its elements is concerned. It is the
positive content, common to manycommon end of the most diverse
poor, that an association of the poor, destinies, an ocean into which lives
as such, arises. Thus, the result of thederived from the most diverse social
extreme phenomenon of poverty, thestrata flow together. No change, de-
lack of shelter, is that those who findvelopment, polarization, or breakdown
themselves in such a situation in the of social life occurs without leaving
large cities congregate in specificits residuum in the stratum of poverty.
places of refuge. When the first stacksWhat is most terrible in poverty is
of hay arise in the vicinity of Berlin,the fact that there are human beings
those who lack shelter, the Penner, gowho, in their social position, are just
there to take advantage of the op-poor and nothing but poor. This is
portunity to spend a comfortable different from the simple fact of be-
night. One finds among them a type ing poor which each one has to face
of incipient organization, whereby the for himself and which is merely a
Penner of each district have a kind shade of another individually qualified
of headman who assigns to the mem-position. The fact of being just poor
bers of the district their places in theand nothing but poor is particularly
night shelter and arbitrates their quar-apparent where expanding and in-
rels. The Penner scrupulously see todiscriminate almsgiving prevails, such
it that no criminal infiltrates them, as during the Christian Middle Ages
and, when this happens, they de- and in Islamic lands. However, so
nounce him to the police to whom long as one accepted it as an official
they often render good services. The and unchangeable fact, it did not
headmen of the Penner are well-
have the bitter and contradictory char-
acter which the progressive and ac-
known persons whom the authorities
tivistic tendency of modern times
always know how to find when they
140 SOCIAL PROBLEMS
imposes on a whole a unique

class: a class sociologicawhich
bases its unity aon number a ofpurely
individuals who,passive
out
of a purely individual
characteristic, specifically the fate,
factoccupy that
the society acts a specific
toward it and
organic position deals
within the
whole; but this
with it in a particular way.positionTo
is notdeprive
deter-
those who receive mined
almsby this of
fate and condition,polit-
their but
rather by the expresses
ical rights adequately fact that others-indi-
the
viduals,
fact that they are associations, communities-at-
nothing but poor.
As a result of this
tempt to lack of
correct this positive
condition. Thus,
qualification, as
whathas already
makes one been
poor is not the lack
noted, the stratumof means.
of The poor person,
the poor, sociologi-
not-
withstanding theircally speaking,
common is the individual
situation,who
does not give risereceives
to assistance because of this lack
sociologically uni-
of means.
fying forces. In this way, poverty is
THE SOCIOLOGY OF POVERTY
To the Memory of Georg Simmel
LEWIS A. COSER
Brandeis University
Discussions of the extent of poverty

typical not only of the deprived but
in a given society usually haveofbeen
very large strata of the population.
dogged by definitional problems.The
Oneeconomies of such societies are
man's poverty is another's wealth;
geared precisely to the creation of ever
new
minimal standards in a developed in-needs.
dustrial society may be viewed as than taking as a point of de-
Rather
Utopian goals in an underdeveloped parture the condition or felt condition
one. What may be felt to constituteof those presumed to be poor, this
unendurable deprivation in a society
paper will attempt to provide a different
where the underprivileged compare perspective. Following Simmel's lead,
their lot with that of others more
poverty will be dealt with as a social
favorably placed in regard to the dis-category that emerges through societal
tribution of income and wealth, maydefinition.1
be Just as in Durkheim's view
accepted as legitimate in societies where
crime can best be defined as consisting
no such comparisons are socially avail-
in acts having "the external character-
able or culturally sanctioned. istic that they evoke from society the
One may argue that a poor man particular
is reaction called punishment,"2
one whose economic means are not
commensurate with the economic ends 1 Georg Simmel, Soziologie, Leipzig:
he seeks; yet this does not stand up Duncker und Humblot, 1908, p. 454-493.
I have relied very heavily on Simmel's
under scrutiny. In societies that ex- hitherto untranslated essay, "Der Arme," in
hibit a strain toward anomy, a dis- the above volume. In fact, much of what
junction between the ends that are I say in the first part of this paper is little
striven for and the means available more than a restatement of some of Sim-
mel's seminal ideas.
for attaining them, boundless appetites
2 Emile Durkheim, The Rules of Socio-
forever create new dissatisfactions at
logical Metbod, New York: The Free Press
every level reached. This seems to be of Glencoe, 1950, p. 35.

Georg Simmel - The Poor

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Georg Simmel - The Poor

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Poor

Author(s): Georg Simmel and Claire Jacobson

once departed from his us

Translated by Claire Jacobson*

Insofar as man is a social being,with

not imply tions, fulfillment

but only of certain objective

asserts that the State out

sentenced an olddenceman toor give

to speak, medieval form does their reaction to

fixed point in the

within this relation since the 18th

hand and with intimate self to be movedknowledge of

jective measure subject but from the interest of the

love-in the case will

and actions, surrounds supraindividual

a wealthy sociological person; or

-that need information

imposes on a whole a unique

THE SOCIOLOGY OF POVERTY

To the Memory of Georg Simmel

Discussions of the extent of poverty

You might also like