Earlier this year, I was approached by a major publisher - a division of Penguin Random House - and asked to consider writing a book for them.
I wrote a quite extensive proposal which described what I called the politics of care, about which I have already written this morning in the context of Donald Trump‘s acknowledgement that much of his behaviour is driven by hate.
When working on that idea, I became interested in the possibility of care not just being a word, but also a mnemonic potentially representing a whole range of ideas, using the letters CARE to explore how such thinking could be used to examine just what the term 'care' might mean.
In the end, I came up with seven mnemonics for care, although I never determined which one should be used above all else.
I'm interested in what readers here might think, and I will be asking using four polls, which are at the bottom of this post, and I am genuinely interested in the answers if you are willing to participate in this.
My thinking suggested the C might stand for:
- Cooperation: politics grounded in working together rather than in competition
- Care: recognising human and ecological needs as central
- Community: valuing collective belonging over individual goals
- Connection: recognising interdependence among people and with nature
- Common good: prioritising what benefits all rather than the few
- Compassion: treating all with dignity and kindness
- Creativity: imagining new solutions beyond existing orthodoxies
Similarly, I came up with this list using the letter A (which was the hardest to do):
- Accountability: power must be answerable to people and communities
- Action: turning principles into practice
- Access: ensuring everyone has the essentials of life
- Agency: enabling people to shape their own futures
- Aspiration: creating hope and vision for better futures
- Authenticity: acting with honesty and integrity in politics
- Autonomy: protecting freedom of thought and action
Then I compiled the following possible meanings suggested by the letter R:
- Renewal: institutions and society should be continually refreshed to meet real needs
- Restoration: repairing what exploitation and neglect have damaged
- Resilience: building strength to withstand social and ecological shocks
- Redistribution: sharing resources fairly to tackle inequality
- Responsibility: taking collective duty for one another seriously
- Reciprocity: mutual respect and obligation in social life
- Regeneration: renewing society and nature for future generations
Finally, I came up with this list of ideas that the letter E could represent:
- Equity: fair outcomes across income, gender, race, and generation
- Empathy: grounding decisions in understanding and compassion
- Ecology: placing planetary health at the heart of policy
- Empowerment: giving voice and capacity to those excluded
- Earth: keeping the planet central to every choice
- Engagement: encouraging participation and shared decision-making
- Enjoyment: valuing joy, culture, and fulfilment as political goals
I reckoned that by the time I had got this far, I had pushed the idea sufficiently to think that, amongst these options, the most useful might be found.
That said, I did realise that putting these together in different ways might result in different spins being put on the various combinations that might make up the mnemonic CARE. Although I gave this a bit of thought, I will not pursue that further, here and now. Instead, might I ask that you think about which of these terms you prefer? In each of the four polls, you can use a maximum of three votes. I am looking forward to seeing the answers.
Poll 1 - What might the C in CARE stand for? You have three votes.
Loading ...Poll 2 - What might the A in CARE stand for? You have three votes.
Loading ...Poll 3 - What might the R in CARE stand for? You have three votes.
Loading ...Poll 4 - What might the E in CARE stand for? You have three votes.
Loading ...Comments
When commenting, please take note of this blog's comment policy, which is available here. Contravening this policy will result in comments being deleted before or after initial publication at the editor's sole discretion and without explanation being required or offered.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
I’m looking forward to the book!
It may just be articles here…
What happened to Penguin publishing it?
They wanted a journalistic style book, packed with interviews, and that is not my style.
Please discuss the Right to healthcare and right to health.
These have to be enforceable, reliable and subject to sanctions if failures occur.
How to design such a system to ensure care is provided?
Can care be commodified or reliably provided by a community?
The duty of care extends to governments, industry , legal industry, providers, funders, the individual , families etc.
In Europe most care is delivered in community governed care institutions but subject to nationally determined funding and regulatory regimes. This ensures a reliable open ended funding source allied to the quantity of care delivered. ie fee for service.
Thus for me CARE is :
C ommunity based
A cccountably delivered , governed within well designed national funding systemsand regulated to ensure good quality
R especting the Right of the individuals to receive care according to their needs throughout their life , subject to reasonable contributions based on ability to pay, either through national insurance or otherwise.
E nforceably delivered by professional providers , suitably licensed to deliver care.
There are however limits to care. No one is exempt from the risk of accident, pollution, hazards, disease and infirmity.
But Industry have a legal Duty of Care for Health and Safety and our governments have a duty of care to regulate , legislate and to hold accountable institutions charged with delivering care. The individual has a duty of care to themselves and others.
E as enforcability? Interesting…
There is no point in having rights to health and social care if these rights are unenforceable when needed.
Care can be sloganised as an aspiration if you are not careful.
Care is routinely denied at present with excuses of affordability , labour shortages, capacity constraints etc.
Care should be an enforeable right and legislators should be prosecuted for legislative negligence for not passing laws to ensure heath and care rights are not enforced, regulators and providers equally for not ensuring systems and provision are not adequate for purpose , and that in the breach when rights are not met compensation should be provided without a legal nightmare (no fault compensation).
I’ve had a lifetime in healthcare and given this a lot of thought.
It might be not what you had in mind but I assure you its what is necessary.
Noted
https://www.careinternational.org.uk/about/our-mission-vision/
I presume you already know about this group?
I do
I think CARE as a mnemonic could be confusing for potential readers as it is so frequently used in healthcare settings. When I saw the blog header I assumed you were going to talk about social care.
I do like the idea but I am not sure it would work well on a broad audience who might only glance the cover?
I think the real opposite to Trump and co is GRACE. It could be used as a similar mnemonic but you would need some ideas for G!
Noted, but that is not a word I would use – too many would be alienated by it.
I would have liked ’empathy’ but it’s been belittled lately by the far right. Might be best not to use terms that would immediately be labelled ‘woke’. We know that’s a good thing but a….
My vote was accepted for C, R and E but when I clicked on submit for A, I received this message ‘You Had Already Voted For This Poll. Poll ID #206’ Did I make a mistake?
Craig
Not sure.
The “politics” of care is directly related to the type of political system human beings live under. We appear to be a long way still as a species from determining an optimum political system:-
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7384560/
But is there one, Schofield?
The Spartans, in their pomp, preferred their client states/allies in the Peloponnesian League etc to be oligarchies – easier to deal with, people like us etc. A bit like trade today. And they did their best to undermine and destroy any democracies within range.
Empires know a thing or two…
The unfolding pattern of time suggests that these forms of governance will alternate – perhaps as described in Burgess’s A Clockwork Orange – rather than result in an optimum. However, a steady state economy, which I firmly support, is likely to be conducive to a stable society, and an optimal system, almost certainly democratic, might have time to emerge…
Fair comment. The late anthropologist Christopher Boehm believed that human beings always had to watch out for other human beings with special attributes (control of capital for example) or skills (political oratory advantage for example) abusing or taking advantage of other human beings because of these.
https://bobsutton.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/06/apes-humans-and-the-no-asshole-rule.html
https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/political_primates
So in my view it’s always a matter for the foreseeable future of a balancing act to optimise human societies. Is there an evolutionary arrow though pushing for better balancing?
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/247759661_Evolution_of_Parental_Caregiving
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3471369/pdf/nihms401950.pdf
I am with Boehm.
C:
Composite – made up of differences, and strong, stable as a result
Co-existing – again emphasising that difference can operate alongside each other.
Never mind creating a mnemonic – just caring would be good enough for me.
🙂
On this theme I had this article published in the WestEnglandBylines
https://westenglandbylines.co.uk/business/economy/building-a-society-that-takes-or-that-cares-which-would-you-prefer/
Thanks
Not normally one for commenting after voting, I feel the wish to do so today. With so many combinations possible, I would like to argue for my votes post hoc. (Yes, I made only one choice in each category.)
Community
Not to us, or for us, but *by* us. The counter to Thatcher’s dismissal of “society”. Linking people, removing boundaries that prevent us understanding that “the other” is really “us”. As wide or as narrow as we can personally affect by words or by deeds.
Action
Fine words butter no parsnips. Commitment to “my neighbour” by *doing* things together. Meeting the needs of the Community.
[for]
Restoration
Of Community, of the environment, of our commitment to our wider responsibilities to peaces and our planet.
[and]
Empowerment
from giving the Community confidence by sharing talents, by being heard no matter how small our voice, by achieving our dreams with the power of a union that cares about you and me.
Thank you
The outcomes here are not what I expected
I included a vote each for creativity and enjoyment as some of the likely outcomes of a politics of care.
Thanks
I understand and obviously agree with the sentiment and the objectives but feel that CARE, in a sense, is already taken. Care industry etc. I’m thinking of an alternative but no luck so far!
Tell me if you do…
I searched for CARE synonyms using Word Hippo, which delivered 32 different meanings for both noun and verb, such as:
A humanitarian treatment or consideration for others
The state of supervising, protecting, and maintaining the health and welfare of a subject
(likely the relevant meanings in your topic)
Then others, such as:
Careful management of available resources
To like in an emphatic manner, or have a strong liking for
Perhaps a more targeted word might be better, although nothing springs to mind immediately 🙁
I admit that so far I am sticking with it
Had a play on ChatGPT…
FAIR as a Political Mnemonic
F = Future / Fulfilment / Freedom
• Future: acting for generations to come.
• Fulfilment: valuing joy, culture, and human flourishing.
• Freedom: autonomy, protecting rights and dignity.
A = Accountability / Agency / Access / Aspiration
• Accountability: power must answer to people and communities.
• Agency: enabling people to shape their futures.
• Access: ensuring life’s essentials for all.
• Aspiration: creating hope and vision for better futures.
I = Integrity / Inclusion / Interdependence / Imagination
• Integrity: authenticity and honesty in politics.
• Inclusion: valuing community, belonging, equity.
• Interdependence: recognising connection with people and planet.
• Imagination: creativity to seek new solutions.
R = Renewal / Responsibility / Resilience / Reciprocity
• Renewal: keeping institutions fresh and responsive.
• Responsibility: collective duty toward one another.
• Resilience: building strength to withstand shocks.
• Reciprocity: mutual respect and fairness.
⸻
The beauty of FAIR is that it already signals justice, equity, transparency, while the expanded mapping anchors it in care, creativity, community, ecology, and accountability — the heart of your framework.
CORE as a Political Mnemonic
C = Care / Community / Cooperation / Compassion / Creativity
• Care: putting human and ecological needs at the center.
• Community: valuing belonging and solidarity over isolation.
• Cooperation: working together instead of competing.
• Compassion: treating everyone with dignity and kindness.
• Creativity: imagining new solutions beyond old orthodoxies.
O = Openness / Opportunity / Organising / Optimism
• Openness: transparency, honesty, participation.
• Opportunity: ensuring access to life’s essentials and chances to thrive.
• Organising: empowering people to act collectively.
• Optimism: building hope and aspiration into politics.
R = Renewal / Responsibility / Resilience / Reciprocity / Regeneration
• Renewal: keeping society and institutions responsive.
• Responsibility: collective duty toward one another.
• Resilience: building strength against social and ecological shocks.
• Reciprocity: mutual respect and fairness.
• Regeneration: repairing and replenishing nature and community.
E = Equity / Empathy / Ecology / Empowerment / Earth / Engagement / Enjoyment
• Equity: fairness across income, gender, race, generation.
• Empathy: grounding decisions in compassion.
• Ecology: placing planetary health at the heart of policy.
• Empowerment: giving voice and capacity to those excluded.
• Earth: keeping the planet central to choices.
• Engagement: shared decision-making and participation.
• Enjoyment: valuing joy, culture, fulfilment.
⸻
CORE works especially well rhetorically — you can say: “Politics must return to its core: Care, Openness, Responsibility, and Equity.”
Fair is so open to abuse, though.
And Core – can you have a politics of core? No. I get the semantics, bit the syntax is a non-starter. I think it has to work at both levels.
Fair enough!
If you’re being paid to care for someone by the government, then is that really caring. You would be a mercenary carer after all, but also working for an employer that doesn’t really care about you and your working conditions. It’s fourth quadrant spending so why should the politically controlled care giver give a damn if you’ll excuse the language.
The comparison to the most obvious alternative does not reflect well on caring being an insistence of the central government.
This, very politely is a crass argument that assumes the individual is incapable of rising above the compensation impluct in a contract to express real humanity. It is an argument beloveed of tbhe far right Christian who says that care not voluntarily given (i.e. not charity) does not count and so government must not do it. You are a troll.
Another C word:
Conscious or Consciousness.
All stressed out societies tend to do is react.
I rather like that