Human minimum should be in the foreground

“One of the most important challenges is to develop and defend a common humane minimum despite opposing positions,” commented Frieder Otto Wolf, President of the Humanist Association of Germany, yesterday on the debate about modern forms of the welfare state within the Christian churches. The focus of the churches’ “Social Policy Ash Wednesday” on Wednesday was the future prospects of the welfare state. Under the theme “The welfare state of the 21st century needs two legs”, the event organized by the Protestant Church in the Rhineland and the Diocese of Essen dealt with questions of solidarity and justice. Jutta Allmendinger, President of the Social Science Research Center Berlin, spoke at the event. Among other things, she spoke about a paradigm shift from the classic caring and providing welfare state to an “activating welfare state” that no longer neglects the areas of education and training. She clearly criticized austerity plans in education policy. “On the one hand, practical humanism demands that no one should be forced to live in inhumane conditions,” Wolf continued. The various forms of poverty are therefore also a central problem for humanists, as the Humanist Social Word published two years ago shows. However, this is not linked to a concrete scientific diagnosis of the situations, problems and mechanisms of historical processes within the framework of practical humanism, explained Wolf. Agreement on a humane minimum would be the focus in order to provide standards for joint action. And a state that empowers and enables participation through education instead of a “state system of repair stores” should also be seen as a model to be supported according to humanist principles, “if it takes the guarantee of humane mimicry for all seriously”. Frieder Otto Wolf: “The development of a culture of scientific debate that takes such issues seriously and dismantles all dogmatization is of course essential. There is still a lot to do here, just as there is with regard to agreeing on a humane minimum, and both are very important tasks for a truly contemporary humanism.”