by Abe Sullivan

Created on: October 14, 2009   Last Updated: October 20, 2009

The two definitions for welfare in the Webster Merriam dictionary are: 1. aid in the form of money or necessities for those in need, and 2. the agency or program through which such aid is distributed.

If we are participating in a true debate about welfare which is free from social, historical, or regional constraints then allow me to start with an international example.

The single largest recipient of US welfare is the nation of Israel. Relatively free from all mainstream forms of the welfare stigma, Israel enjoys enormous political and social support from the mainstream American public as well as the American political establishment. To continue providing the country with a steady flow of welfare, derived from the US taxpayer, is practically an article of faith. According to a congressional services research report (Jeremy, 2009) in the fiscal year of 2009 Israel has received $2.55 billion dollars in welfare from the U.S. American taxpayers unquestionably give seven million dollars per day to the citizens of a nation whose size is no larger than the state of New Jersey.

In the American political arena Calling for the withdrawal of such welfare is synonymous with calling for the destruction of the Jewish state, and all charges of antisemitism that accompany such a stigma.

Interestingly not only is this form of welfare attacked it is in fact celebrated. Newspaper editors, history textbooks, and documentary producers, both Israeli and American, boast about the material accomplishments Israel has made with American handouts. Just as we are raised on the false idea of Israeli pioneers who single-handedly made the 'desert bloom' through their hard work and self sufficiency, alone we are also raised on the myth that the American west was founded by self sufficient pioneers who went west to raise himself up by their boot straps.

The reality is, that from the settlement of the west to the development of the Suburbia, American welfare has produced the most heavily subsidized lifestyles in history.

Welfare is so much a part of American life that it has never been much of an argument in the American forum, what has been an argument is who should be allowed to receive welfare. In America, unfortunately, the perception of welfare depends on the attitude that one has toward the race of the beneficiary. In this case white's opposition to welfare is rooted in their attitudes toward blacks (Gilens 1996). This is why the international welfare provided to Israeli citizen is seldom challenged, the welfare that was given to settlers of the western frontier is seldom investigated and the welfare provided to subsidize the lifestyles of the denizens of suburbia is never evoked in the welfare debate.

The idea of helping those in need has never been a controversial issue in the history of any civilized people. If we are to have a true debate about welfare we must not limit the idea to the context of American popular perceptions which are marred with myths and racial stereotypes. Once we accomplish this goal most people will agree that the concept welfare can only be both harmful or beneficial depending on what purpose the beneficiary has intended for it.

Gilens, M. (1996). `Race coding' and white opposition to welfare. American Political Science Review, 90(3), 593. http://search.ebscohost.com.proxy.usf.edu

Sharp, Jeremy. (2009). U.S. Foreign Aid to Israel. Congressional Research Review,

Learn more about this author, Abe Sullivan.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.