A critical Marxist lens is best to examine a UBI – it is interdisciplinary which allows us to look at sociological implications beyond economic efficiency.

Critique is typically contrasted with ideal-theory (see Engelstad, 2021). Much of the existing normatively oriented literature on UBI derives from the ‘Ideal-Theory’ tradition (Bidadanure, 2019); from thinkers’ abstract philosophising about ‘just’ societies. For example, Van Parijs (1991) adopts a quasi-Rawlsian methodology to advocate for the normative merits of UBI. In contrast to such ‘god’s eye’, ‘transcendent’ philosophising, critical theorists prefer a sociological analysis anchored within existing social norms and practices (Strydom, 2011). This means that critical theorists seek to explore the relative strengths and weaknesses of an idea on the basis of the purported strengths claimed by its advocates, providing a base in existing political struggles and debates (Horkheimer, 2002; see Delanty, 2020; Schaub, 2015). While such an approach can be formalised in immanent ‘normative reconstructive’ methodologies (see Buchwalter, 2016: 57–88); in this paper, I adopt a less-formulaic perspective, identifying the purported strengths that advocates of UBI claim, which I then subject to interrogation to determine their coherence. The word ‘coherence’ is important here. Critical theory derives from the left-Hegelian tradition and is invested in a dialectical approach to sociological research (Horkheimer, 2002; see Delanty, 2020). The instability of a contradiction is held to be the guiding force for social transition and is invested with normative and pedagogic weight (see Held, 1980). Critical theory is also methodologically distinctive in its negativity; there is an explicit investment in the value of a negative ‘critique’ (Adorno, (1990 [1966]); Freyenhagen, 2013). Contrary to the ‘positivist bias’ of much sociological enquiry,10 for critical theorists one does not need to suggest a ‘solution’ to provide a useful contribution to a debate: simply identifying the limitations of a proposition, or of a form of thought or desire, can be of vital importance (see Delanty, 2020; Marcuse, 1969: 11).11 The approach adopted in this paper is simple: I identify the central claims raised in support of UBI by its left-libertarian advocates and analyse their coherence. I filter the purported benefits of UBI through a conceptual arsenal rooted in critical theory. I shall interrogate the alleged strengths of UBI in light of their ability to challenge ‘reification’ and forms of pathological ‘real abstraction’. This conceptual lexicon enables an analysis which is not merely concerned with distributional justice, or optimal efficiency, but engages a wider range of socio-political pathologies (Harris, 2019; Thompson, 2022). As such, I argue that critical theory provides an important, and underutilised, interdisciplinary-sociological perspective, which can shed new light on UBI.