Social work can be inherently argued as being rooted in principles of care, equity, and justice, yet it operates within a system heavily shaped by the ideology of capitalist realism. As Mark Fisher (2009) explores in Capitalist Realism: Is There No Alternative?, the pervasive belief in the inevitability of capitalism constrains not only economic and political structures but also cultural and social systems. For social workers, this ideology poses unique challenges, from the commodification of care to the bureaucratisation of welfare services. This article examines how capitalist realism affects the field of social work and explores pathways to resist its dehumanising tendencies.
The dominance of capitalist realism in social work fosters what Mark Fisher (2009) might describe as a “bland, surrender to the blender” approach, where systemic critique is abandoned in favor of homogenised, surface-level solutions. This occurs when the complexities of social issues are reduced to standardised practices and performance metrics that prioritise efficiency over meaningful intervention.
Social workers, constrained by apparent neoliberal demands for quick results and measurable outcomes, are forced to adopt a “one-size-fits-all” approaches, blending diverse client needs into a uniform framework that often fails to address deeper systemic problems.
The result is arguably a diluted form of social work that prioritises bureaucratic compliance over creativity, innovation, and individualised care, ultimately perpetuating the very inequities it seeks to resolve. By surrendering to these pressures, social work risks becoming a passive enabler of neoliberal ideology, rather than a transformative force for social justice.
Neoliberalism in Social Work Practice
Under neoliberal capitalism, social work can be seen as increasingly shifting from addressing systemic inequities to focusing on individual responsibility. Fisher (2009) argues that capitalist realism privatises social issues, framing problems such as poverty, homelessness, and mental health struggles as personal failures rather than symptoms of structural inequality. For justice social workers, this could translate into interventions that prioritise measurable outcomes, supervised work, support compliance, or educational obtainment over holistic, person-centered care.
Social work as an institution, once envisioned as a safety net, now could be argued as operating under a market driven logics. Budget cuts, privatisation, and an emphasis on cost-efficiency often reduce clients to statistics, while social workers are burdened with excessive caseloads and bureaucratic constraints (Harris, 2014). This not only undermines the quality of care but also perpetuates burnout and disillusionment among practitioners (Morley & Macfarlane, 2021).
A direct practice example of capitalism influencing social work in Scotland could be seen in the outsourcing and privatisation of services. For instance, many essential social care services, such as foster care, residential placements, or mental health support, are delivered by private companies. While these services are vital, they are often governed by profit-driven models rather than purely needs-led approaches.
In practice, this might manifest as:
Inequitable Access to Services: Social workers may find that private providers prioritise placements or services for individuals with higher levels of funding, such as those supported by specific government grants, leaving others with unmet needs.
Budget-Driven Decision-Making: Social workers might face pressure to make decisions based on financial constraints, such as opting for cheaper, shorter-term interventions even when they are not in the client’s best interests.
Increased Caseloads and Burnout: With funding often tied to “efficiency savings,” organisations may reduce staffing levels while maintaining or increasing workloads, leaving social workers overstretched and diminishing the quality of care they can provide.
This intersection of capitalism and social work as Fischer may argue, creates ethical dilemmas, as social workers are often forced to navigate tensions between financial priorities and their duty to advocate for the rights and wellbeing of those they support.
Mental Health in a Capitalist World
Fisher’s (2009) insights into the link between capitalist realism and mental health resonate deeply in social work practice. The rise of depression, anxiety, and stress in the population is not coincidental but could be tied to the alienation and precarity associated with neoliberal life. Social workers frequently encounter individuals who are unemployed, overworked, or socially isolated which could be seen as symptoms of a society driven by competition and productivity. However, as Fisher critiques, mental health is often individualised and medicalised rather than understood as a systemic issue.
For example, a client struggling with anxiety due to unstable housing is more likely to be prescribed medication than to receive structural support, such as access to affordable housing or employment opportunities (Peck, 2010). This may reflect Fisher’s capitalist realist mindset: treating the symptom while ignoring the root cause.
The Bureaucratisation of Care
Social work in this lens has become increasingly bureaucratised under the pressures of capitalist realism. Metrics and performance indicators dominate the field, reducing care to checklists and compliance targets. Fisher (2009) critiques this managerial logic, arguing that it prioritises paperwork over meaningful interactions. For social workers, this results in a tension between fulfilling institutional demands and providing authentic, compassionate support to clients.
Consider the example of child welfare: social workers may spend more time completing assessments and reports than engaging with the families they are tasked to help (Garrett, 2010). While these systems are intended to ensure accountability, they often dehumanise both clients and practitioners, reinforcing feelings of powerlessness.
Challenging Capitalist Realism in Social Work
Reimagining Social Work as Collective Action
Fisher (2009) emphasises the importance of collective imagination in resisting capitalist realism. Social workers, as frontline advocates for vulnerable populations, are then uniquely positioned to challenge the status quo. This begins by reframing their role: rather than simply navigating existing systems, social workers can act as agents of systemic change.
Community organising, advocacy for policy reform, and collaboration with grassroots movements can help social workers push back against neoliberal constraints. For example, social workers then involving themselves in housing justice campaigns, would anot only address individual clients’ needs but also challenge the broader structures that perpetuate homelessness (Morley, 2022).
Centering Structural Analysis
A key lesson from Capitalist Realism is the necessity of recognising systemic roots. Social workers can resist the pull of individualisation by consistently framing issues like poverty or mental health in their structural context. Learning programs and social work education can further emphasise anti-oppressive frameworks, critical theory, and systemic analysis, equipping practitioners to see beyond capitalist realist narratives (Harris, 2014).
Advocating for Holistic Care Models
Holistic, person-centered approaches to care offer an alternative to the fragmented logic of neoliberal social work. By prioritising relationships over metrics and addressing the interconnected nature of social issues, social workers can create spaces of resistance within their practice. This might include trauma-informed care, restorative justice approaches, or community-based mental health initiatives (Garrett, 2010).
Conclusion
Mark Fisher’s Capitalist Realism offers a powerful lens for understanding the challenges faced by social workers in a neoliberal era. The commodification of care, the bureaucratisation of services, and the individualisation of social issues are not insurmountable barriers but symptoms of an ideology that can be challenged. Social workers, guided by their commitment to justice and equity, have the potential to envision and enact alternatives to capitalist realism, redefining social work as a collective, transformative process.
By acknowledging the systemic nature of the struggles they address and working in solidarity with broader movements for change, social workers can help create a world where alternatives to capitalism are not only imaginable but achievable.
References
Fisher, M. (2009) Capitalist Realism: Is There No Alternative? Winchester: Zero Books.
Garrett, P.M. (2010) ‘Examining the ‘conservative revolution’: Neoliberalism and social work education’, Social Work Education, 29(4), pp. 340–355.
Harris, J. (2014) Social Work and Social Welfare in a Neoliberal World. London: Routledge.
Morley, C. and Macfarlane, S. (2021) ‘Critical social work practice in the neoliberal context: Working resistance’, Australian Social Work, 74(2), pp. 182–194.
Morley, C. (2022) Practicing Critical Reflection in Social Work. 2nd edn. London: Routledge.
Peck, J. (2010) Constructions of Neoliberal Reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Not So Social Work 
Leave a comment