In their new book, Building Better Societies: Promoting Social Justice in a World Falling Apart (Policy Press, 2017), Rowland Atkinson, Lisa Mckenzie and Simon Winlow (eds.) make a strong case for the ‘prosocial’ approach to societal transformation. The entire book critiques neoliberalism and the ensuing individualism that has resulted from operating society as though it were a business. Building Better Societies advances an alternative way forward: valuing communal approaches to social betterment. The book is segmented into chapters that cover first the problems (chapters 2–4), then the ideas (chapters 5– 9) and finally the future (chapters 10–14) of what building better societies through a prosocial approach would entail. This is not a novel argument, and the authors find themselves in good company with similar arguments for social justice that have been made by their contemporaries. What is novel, perhaps, is the framing of their critique as not merely an anti-capitalist approach but also a parallel advancement of a pro-social approach and the articulation of ideas supporting the advancement of that agenda. Yet advancing the agenda is also where Atkinson, Mckenzie, and Winlow could have further elaborated; not just creating the language and frame for future progress but spending more time fleshing out specific and viable alternatives. Readers of this book might be left wondering what concrete steps would be involved in moving to a prosocial society. To begin the book, the editors discuss rising inequality, name the benefactors of neoliberalist ideology (those already in positions of privilege) and problematize the sustained attack on “the social”. The editors label modern society as anti-social and call for big ideas from social scientists to break the chains collectively binding us. The contributors to the book dutifully oblige and present bold framings of a society gone awry. Throughout the book, attention is drawn to the gradual but consistent destruction of the social safety net and the erosion of social protections in favour of policies purporting enhanced individual freedom and choice. Paradoxically, these moralizing techniques for social control have come at the cost of true freedom and liberty for the many who are unable to get ahead under market-based models of social protection. In the Valuing and Strengthening Community chapter (4), that is likely of interest to most readers of this journal, Mckenzie artfully tells a story of the changing rhetoric about economic value that has come with neoliberalism in the UK. She identifies the increasing stigma directed toward working-class families, and the growing paternalism in the welfare system. She illustrates these changes through a story about Sharon (p 45), a friendly and well-connected mother of two from Nottingham, who goes from volunteering at a community kitchen 16 hours/week while also receiving income and housing support from the government, to being forced by her benefits adviser to take a paid position at a cheese-packing factory because her previous labour was not valued as real work. The ideas put forth in the book range dramatically. The authors spend time exploring the connections between masculinity and violence at the individual and community level, and then naming economic violence caused by capitalism as such (p 65). References are made to attacks on cities and the need to protect and defend the right to an urban life. One chapter explains how arts-based research can tell stories about experiences of poverty without furthering negative portrayals or distorting “the everyday realities of residents’” lives in ways that imply radical social difference at the “expense of their commonality with other neighborhoods” (p 88). Similarly, the following chapter explores exclusion in local communities and advances the case for co-production of knowledge alongside research methodologies which respect diverse ways of knowing. In order to put the social back into social policy, the authors argue the necessity to view humans as social beings rather than “rational

中文翻译：

---

罗兰·阿特金森、丽莎·麦肯齐和西蒙·温洛：建设更好的社会：在分崩离析的世界中促进社会正义

在他们的新书《建设更好的社会：在分崩离析的世界中促进社会正义》（Policy Press，2017 年）中，Rowland Atkinson、Lisa Mckenzie 和 Simon Winlow（编辑）为社会转型的“亲社会”方法提供了强有力的理由。整本书都批判了新自由主义和随之而来的个人主义，这种个人主义是将社会当作一项企业经营而产生的。建设更美好的社会提出了另一种前进方式：重视改善社会的公共方法。本书分为几个章节，首先涵盖问题（第 2-4 章），然后是想法（第 5-9 章），最后是通过亲社会方法建设更美好社会的未来（第 10-14 章）。这不是一个新颖的论点，作者发现他们与同时代人提出的社会正义论点很相似。也许新颖之处在于，他们的批评不仅是一种反资本主义的方法，而且是亲社会方法的平行推进，以及支持该议程推进的思想的表达。然而推进议程也是阿特金森、麦肯齐和温洛本可以进一步阐述的地方。不仅要为未来的进步创造语言和框架，还要花更多的时间充实具体和可行的替代方案。本书的读者可能会想知道要进入亲社会社会需要采取哪些具体步骤。在本书的开头，编辑们讨论了日益加剧的不平等，列举新自由主义意识形态的恩人（那些已经处于特权地位的人），并将对“社会”的持续攻击问题化。编辑们将现代社会标记为反社会，并呼吁社会科学家提出伟大的想法来打破束缚我们的锁链。这本书的撰稿人尽职尽责，并提出了一个出现问题的社会的大胆框架。在整本书中，人们关注社会安全网的逐渐但持续的破坏和社会保护的侵蚀，以支持声称增强个人自由和选择的政策。矛盾的是，对于许多无法在基于市场的社会保护模式下取得成功的人来说，这些用于社会控制的道德化技术是以牺牲真正的自由和自由为代价的。在重视和加强社区一章 (4) 中，这本杂志的大多数读者可能会感兴趣，麦肯齐巧妙地讲述了英国新自由主义带来的关于经济价值的修辞不断变化的故事。她指出了针对工人阶级家庭的日益严重的污名，以及福利制度中日益增长的家长式作风。她通过一个关于 Sharon（第 45 页）的故事来说明这些变化，Sharon 是一位来自诺丁汉的友好且人脉广泛的两个孩子的母亲，她从每周 16 小时在社区厨房做志愿者，同时还从政府那里获得收入和住房支持，到被她的福利顾问强迫在一家奶酪包装厂担任带薪职位，因为她以前的劳动不被视为真正的工作。书中提出的想法范围非常广泛。作者花时间在个人和社区层面探索男子气概与暴力之间的联系，然后将资本主义造成的经济暴力命名为此类（第 65 页）。提到了对城市的攻击以及保护和捍卫城市生活权的必要性。一章解释了以艺术为基础的研究如何讲述贫困经历的故事，而不会进一步负面描绘或扭曲“居民的日常生活”，以“牺牲与其他社区的共同点”为代价，暗示根本的社会差异（第88）。同样，下一章探讨了当地社区的排斥现象，并提出了知识共同生产以及尊重不同认识方式的研究方法的案例。为了将社会重新纳入社会政策，