The Impact of Policies: Social Murder to Social Affection
Since learning about Engels’ concept of Social Murder from Asanda Ngoasheng, I have been conceptualising this visual in relation to Social Affection, a term I discovered when writing Building Inclusion - The Book. I request Built Environment professionals and policy-makers consider it - creating the context in which people can love where they live.
Social Murder
Friedrich Engels, a 19th-century German philosopher and social scientist, introduced the concept of "social murder" in his influential 1845 work, The Condition of the Working Class in England. This term refers to the systemic conditions created by the ruling classes that lead to the premature deaths of the working poor. Engels argued that these deaths were not accidents but the predictable consequences of policies and structures that prioritised profit over human welfare.
Social Affection
I first heard this term used by Irish journalist Mary Leland in the film “The Sprawling Octopus of an Elevated Highway” by Michelle Delea. “Social Affection” is a John Ruskin term used in his 1860 essay "The Roots of Honour". In it Ruskin critiques contemporary political economy for neglecting the role of human emotions and relationships in economic considerations. Ruskin advocates for an economic system that recognises and nurtures the moral and emotional dimensions of human life, promoting a more humane and equitable society.
Given both ideas are rooted in Victorian observations of inequality, it seems natural to bring them together to use as a lens to view current inequality and the impact of policies and economics on populations.
I felt that creating a spectrum from social murder (policies causing systemic harm and premature death) to social affection (policies fostering well-being, belonging, and thriving communities) is a useful way to evaluate the moral and practical impact of policies.
In the below document, I outline six types of policies that would have the greatest impact across this spectrum and describe their effects from one extreme to the other.
I hope you'll find this useful to share with people who create impact with their decisions, and how inclusion strategy around culture and behaviours can support with positive outcomes.
A framework proposal detailing the impact of policies from Social Murder to Social Affection
1) Housing Policy
Social Murder
Policies that neglect housing needs, such as slum clearance without adequate replacement housing, or failures in safety regulations (e.g., Grenfell Tower). Outcomes include homelessness, overcrowding, health issues, and increased mortality.
Examples: Cuts to council housing budgets, unaffordable housing markets.
Social Affection
Policies that ensure high-quality, affordable housing with community-driven designs. Outcomes include improved mental health, neighbourhood pride, and stronger social bonds.
Examples: Green social housing initiatives, co-housing schemes.
2) Healthcare Policy
Social Murder
Policies that underfund or restrict access to healthcare, leading to preventable deaths. Outcomes include higher mortality rates, poor health outcomes, and generational disadvantage.
Examples: NHS austerity cuts, neglecting mental health services.
Social Affection
Policies that prioritize universal access, preventive care, and community-based health initiatives. Outcomes include better health outcomes, lower stress, and trust in the system.
Examples: NHS founding principles, expansion of mental health care.
3) Employment and Labour Policy
Social Murder
Policies that allow exploitative practices, such as zero-hour contracts, low wages, or poor workplace safety standards. Outcomes include poverty, physical and mental health decline, and generational inequality.
Examples: Deregulation of labour laws, failure to implement living wages
Social Affection
Policies that ensure fair wages, work-life balance, and safe working conditions. Outcomes include financial security, job satisfaction, and community cohesion.
Examples: Living wage policies, strong labour protections.
4) Social Welfare Policy
Social Murder
Policies that implement punitive welfare reforms, such as inadequate benefits or hostile bureaucracy (e.g., Universal Credit delays). Outcomes include food insecurity, homelessness, and psychological stress.
Examples: Austerity-era welfare cuts, "sanctions" systems.
Social Affection
Policies that provide a robust safety net, empowering people to rebuild their lives. Outcomes include reduced poverty, higher life satisfaction, and greater social mobility.
Examples: Universal Basic Income, child benefit expansions.
5) Education Policy
Social Murder
Policies that reduce funding for schools, create inequality in access to education, or fail to address systemic barriers (e.g., racism, classism). Outcomes include limited opportunities, reduced social mobility, and cycles of poverty.
Examples: Cuts to public school funding, exclusionary admission practices.
Social Affection
Policies that ensure equitable access to high-quality education, foster inclusivity, and invest in lifelong learning. Outcomes include empowered individuals, community pride, and generational improvement.
Examples: Free school meals programs, funding for arts and vocational education.
6) Environmental Policy
Social Murder
Policies that neglect environmental hazards, such as allowing polluted housing or failing to address climate change. Outcomes include health crises, displacement, and intergenerational harm.
Examples: Weak air quality laws, deregulating industrial emissions.
Social Affection
Policies that prioritise clean air, green spaces, and sustainable development. Outcomes include improved physical and mental health, stronger community ties, and a sense of shared purpose.
Examples: Urban greening projects, renewable energy subsidies.
Spectrum of Impacts
Social Murder
Extreme Harm: Policies cause systemic neglect, preventable deaths, and harm to well-being (e.g., unsafe housing, inaccessible healthcare).
Severe Disempowerment: Policies exacerbate inequality and alienate individuals from society, fostering distrust and despair.
Neutral
Moderate Discontent: Policies meet basic needs but fail to address underlying inequalities or systemic challenges. Outcomes may include stagnation and low satisfaction.
Stagnant Progress: Policies that maintain status quo without fostering thriving communities or addressing structural gaps.
Social Affection
Empowerment: Policies reduce inequalities and provide opportunities for individuals and communities to flourish.
Thriving Communities: Policies foster pride, connection, and well-being, leading to a sense of belonging and shared prosperity.
It would be great is this spectrum could serve as a framework for evaluating policies and their impacts. I hope it encourages policymakers to move beyond avoiding harm (neutral policies) and strive toward fostering thriving, affectionate societies. Tracking outcomes (e.g., life expectancy, well-being indices, community satisfaction) can help assess where policies fall on this spectrum and guide improvement.
