ABSTRACT

Israel provocatively challenges the social-democratic theory of welfare states that was first formulated in the late 1970s by Korpi (1978b, 1983), Castles (1978) and Stephens (1979), and which underpins the influential work of Esping-Andersen (1985, 1990). A hallmark of social-democratic theory is its claim that material interests are the mainsprings of both opposition and support regarding welfare states. Classes are the critical actors driving welfare state development, their interests forcefully articulated by left and right parties and associations of labor and capital. The most advanced welfare states – based on principles of universalism, decommodification and public provision – are found in Scandinavia, and they are the product of the organizational and political power of trade unions and left wing parties. In this setting, it is argued, public support for egalitarian social policy is both broad and skewed (Korpi and Palme, 1998; Svallfors, 2004). Support is broad because social programs are inclusive of the middle classes and their interests. Yet it is also skewed, because the pervasiveness of class conflict in political discourse increases the salience of conflicting class interests concerning social policy. Consequently, compared to other welfare regimes, in socialdemocratic settings public opinion is characterized both by a high level of overall (average) support for the welfare state and prominent class differences.