A first version of this book was published in France in 1994 by Montchrestien as La Social-démocratie de 1945 à nos jours. The original ambition of the English edition was to offer an updated translation of it. But as work progressed, that objective underwent significant alteration, and I have expanded my horizons considerably. It is always in the act of writing that a book is produced and, at the same time, transformed and unveiled. In truth, the present work is new and different, but the themes and problematic it develops are very closely related to those presented more succinctly in the French. While there is no need for the reader to refer to it, it is worth indicating that the French text is not simply a shorter version of the current work, although it is that too.
Six years later, the ‘change’ in social democracy has become the focal point of our analysis. The present study does still seek to provide an overview of the evolution of social democracy, particularly since the Second World War, but the main emphasis is on social democracy today – on what (to adopt Karl Polanyi’s well-known phrase) we regard as a ‘great transformation’. Although the foundations and reference points on which the historical social-democratic movement was constructed are neither totally shaken nor eroded, social democracy is living through a change of epoch. This explains the book’s subtitle.
The constraints inherent in any publication have obliged me to disaggregate certain aspects of the social-democratic phenomenon for the purposes of examining them more closely. I have therefore set aside a detailed study of socialism in southern Europe – something undertaken, in succinct but incomplete fashion, in the French edition (a very detailed examination of the French case was the subject of my doctoral thesis in 1990). This basic choice derived from a concern not to exceed the stipulated word length. But another reason informed my decision and explains this lacuna, which is unquestionably a major one. Although they belong to the same great European socialist/social-democratic family, the parties of southern Europe are less and less strictly tied as political forms to the binary opposition between the ‘social-democratic’ and the ‘non-social-democratic’. In and through a dual dynamic of convergence, the socialisms of the south are converging with the more classical social democracies, which are themselves undergoing ‘de-social-democratization’. The effect is to reduce the old contrasts and narrow the gaps characteristic of a still recent past. Thus, the ‘opposition’ between southern socialism and more classical social democracy (conceived as an opposition between ‘logical types’) is in part-but only in part – diluted. Apart from the space constraints on an already long book, this is the main reason for not examining southern European socialism in detail.
Obviously, perception of social democracy in terms of a ‘model’ – hence in opposition to that which is not social-democratic (omnis determinatio est negatio) – is central in what follows; and this only serves to underline the lacuna in question. But such a perception serves as an instrument to guide the analysis, and is not to be taken for the analysis itself. In any event some ‘harmonics’ are missing in the score of this book, and they are not insignificant. Even so, the analysis that follows, however partial, cannot but engage with some of the more general meanings of social democracy, and cannot avoid providing an overview and suggesting a global logic. That is certainly its ambition, possibly its strength, and definitely its weakness. And that is what renders it anxious about its own certainties.
A book is never a personal matter. I wish to thank a number of colleagues who provided valuable comments on drafts of various chapters of the work: Eustache Kouvélakis, University of Wolverhampton, Chapters 14–18; Gérard Grunberg, Institut d’Études Politiques (Paris), Chapter 7; Sia Anagnos-topoulou, Cyprus University, Chapters 17–18 and Introduction.
I wish also to thank Pierre Avril, University of Paris-II, who directed my attention to the PES. Research on the PES (Chapter 16) would not have been possible without the financial support of the University of Paris-II and the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
I owe a particular debt to Dominique Vivien-Zamboulis, who has proo-fread the French manuscript.
Gregory Elliott translated this book with deep knowledge and great finesse. Not only has he produced an impeccable translation, he has also devoted an extraordinary amount of time and effort to editing footnote references and quoting available English editions of the works I refer to. I thank him very much.
Last but not least, I would like to thank the people at Verso. Their goodwill, immense understanding, and patience in the face of significant delays, alone made production of this book possible. I am very indebted to Sebastian Budgen, who provided his constant support in the realisation of this project.
The people closest to me already know how grateful I am to them.