大河内教授の「新しい社会政策」論について : いわゆる「大河内理論」の破綻(日本経済と地価問題,共同研究)

スポンサーリンク

概要

• 論文の詳細を見る

• The so-called social policy widely known as "Ohkochi's Theory" lies in the "preservation and cultivation of a work force" conforming with the will of the aggregate social capital in modern countries. In other words, he states that the object of social policy is a country stratified into classes, that is, a modern country which is the executor of the will of the aggregate social capital. It seems, therefore, that the object is the working class of the country concerned, namely, the active wage earners who constitute the work force. While he holds fast to these views on the one hand, Prof. Ohkochi insists, on the other hand, that the social policy should extend at the same time to (a) retired workers and (b) nonwage earners also. I do not disagree at all with this idea, because I myself consider that social policy should cover retired workers, small- and medium-sized enterpreneurs, farmers, etc. in addition to the actual wage earners. As a matter of fact, social policy has this tendency. The point is, however, that he tries to maintain this idea despite the fact that he still upholds his theory of the "preservation and cultivation of the work force." To be more specific, on the basis of Prof. Ohkochi's theory, it should be only too natural for the social policy to cover only wage earners in active service, because the purpose of social policy is, according to him, to preserve and cultivate "the work force" as a production factor. That is to say, there is no logical necessity, as he suggests, for "retired workers" and "non-active wage earners" to be entitled to preservation or cultivation from the viewpoint of the aggregate social capital. From the viewpoint of "preservation and cultivation," there is no reason for Professor Ohkochi to insist that social policy should cover "retired workers" and non-active wage earners." Despite this fact, he continues this assertion which is nothing more than self-contradiction. As regards his first argument, I would like to add that it may have such an effect; indeed it will have such an effect. It must be noted in this connection, however, that in a capitalist society where the mechanism of capital accumulation encourages the growith of a relative surplus population, there is little logical necessity for the "preservation of the work force" to be maintained to such an extent. With respect to his second argument, on the other hand, it must be pointed out that this is nothing other than a retraction of his own theory of the "preservation and cultivation of the work force." It may interest you to know that Prof. Ohkochi once severely criticized the theory that social policy was the product of "morals." Despite this fact, however, he is trying to justify his extension of the social policy under the term "social fairness." This clearly shows that he has lowered himself to accept the theory of "morals" which he once rejected so strongly. In the end, Prof. Ohkochi will have either to contradict his former assertion or give up the so-called Ohkochi Theory if he wants to obviate this contradiction. It is clearly proved, therefore, that Prof. Ohkochi's theory has now failed when confronted with the grim realities of the actual social policy now being expanded.

• 日本大学の論文
• 1982-03-20

著者

• 牧野 富夫

  日本大学経済学部

関連論文

• 政府・財界の賃金政策の特徴(グローバル・エコノミー時代の日本経済と最低賃金制,総合研究)
• 最近の企業合理化と終身雇用制(世界経済の変質と日本の対応(総合)-労働政策を中心として-)
• 「日本的雇用慣行」とホワイトカラー
• 「労働問題」の概念規定について : 大河内一男・森五郎両教授批判(個別研究,研究会報告要旨)
• 大河内教授の「新しい社会政策」論について : いわゆる「大河内理論」の破綻(日本経済と地価問題,共同研究)

スポンサーリンク