> Liberal policies in the west are overwhelmingly framed in terms of safeguards and safety nets. For example, it would be great if churches and family structur

> Liberal policies in the west are overwhelmingly framed in terms of safeguards and safety nets. For example, it would be great if churches and family structures would prevent homelessness, but when that fails, what is to be done? That depends where in the West. In America, certainly there remains a place for churches and philantrophic clubs even among liberals who want a strong state-provided safety net. But if you look to e.g. Finland, the Church (there Lutheran and Orthodox) has stepped away from any real charity role now that there is a welfare state. One doesn’t tithe directly to one’s church, but instead a portion of one’s tax money goes directly to the Church one is a registered member of, and that money generally just pays that Church’s administrative bills instead of being spent on societal woes. That is, even the Church believes that the state is broadly a more effective force for these things than private charitable endeavours. Lions Clubs and Rotary Clubs still exist in the Nordic countries, but there are very niche compared to elsewhere.