Egalitarianism and the democratic deconsolidation: Is democracy compatible with socialism?

  • François Facchini
  • Mickael MelkiEmail author


The unprecedented reduction in popular support for democracy represents a risk of democratic deconsolidation. The new situation echoes old debates on the compatibility of democracy with capitalism and socialism. This article provides empirical support for the incompatibility of socialism with democracy by providing evidence suggesting that when citizens adopt egalitarianism as a supreme value, they are ready to sacrifice democracy for the sake of equality. Using individual data, we observe that the decline in support for democracy over generations and over time is accompanied by rising support for egalitarian values in US and European democracies. Moreover, democracies with stronger preferences for egalitarianism also have less public support for democracy, suggesting a tradeoff between both values.


Democracy Deconsolidation Egalitarianism Millennials 

JEL Classification

D31 D72 G38 



We thank Vivekananda Mukherjee, Martin Paldam and the other participants at the Silvaplana Workshop of Political Economy 2019 for very helpful comments. Any remaining errors are ours.


  1. Bernholz, P. (1982). Expanding welfare state, democracy and free market economy: Are they compatible? Zeitschrift für die gesamte Staatswissenschaft/Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, (H. 3), 583–598.Google Scholar
  2. Bernholz, P. (1995). Supreme values, tolerance, and the constitution of liberty. In Gerard Radnitzky & Hardy Bouillon (Eds.), Values and the social order. Avebury: Aldershot.Google Scholar
  3. Bernholz, P. (2001). Democracy and capitalism: Are they compatible in the long-run? In Capitalism and democracy in the 21st century (pp. 9–22). Springer.Google Scholar
  4. Bernholz, P. (2004). Supreme values as the basis for terror. European Journal of Political Economy, 20(2), 317–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bernholz, P. (2017). Totalitarianism, terrorism and supreme values. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bjørnskov, C., & Paldam, M. (2012). The spirits of capitalism and socialism. Public Choice, 150(3–4), 469–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Borooah, V. K., Katos, A. B., & Katsouli, E. (2013). Inter-country differences in voter satisfaction with the democratic process: A study of world elections. Public Choice, 157(3–4), 569–584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eichengreen, B. (2018). The political economy of European monetary unification. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Farrant, A., & McPhail, E. (2009). Hayek, Samuelson, and the logic of the mixed economy? Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 69(1), 5–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Foa, R. S., & Mounk, Y. (2016). The democratic disconnect. Journal of Democracy, 27(3), 5–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Foa, R. S., & Mounk, Y. (2017). The signs of deconsolidation. Journal of Democracy, 28(1), 5–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Friedman, M. (1962). Capitalism and freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
  13. Fukuyama, F. (2006). The end of history and the last man. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  14. Furet, F., & Nolte, E. (2001). Fascism and communism. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
  15. Hall, J. C., & Lawson, R. A. (2014). Economic freedom of the world: An accounting of the literature. Contemporary Economic Policy, 32(1), 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hansen, A. H. (1960). The economics of the soviet challenge. Economic Record, 36(73), 5–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hayek, F. (1944). The road to serfdom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  18. Hayek, F. A. (1949). The intellectuals and socialism. The University of Chicago Law Review, 16(3), 417–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hayek, F. A. (2011). Law, legislation and liberty, volume 3: The political order of a free people. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  20. Ikeda, S. (2002). Dynamics of the mixed economy: Toward a theory of interventionism. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kuttner, S. (2018). Gratian and the Schools of Law, 1140–1234. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lawson, R. A., & Clark, J. R. (2010). Examining the Hayek–Friedman hypothesis on economic and political freedom. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 74(3), 230–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Levitsky, S., & Ziblatt, D. (2018). How democracies die. New York: Crown.Google Scholar
  24. Marx, K. (1968). Œuvres, tomes 1 & 2: Economie.Google Scholar
  25. Moore, B. (1967). Social origins of dictatorship and democracy: Lord and peasant in the making of the modern world (Boston, 1966). In T. Skocpol (Ed.), On Moore, Dennis Smith,” Discovering facts and values: The historical sociology of Barrington Moore,” vision and method in historical sociology. Cambridge, 1984.Google Scholar
  26. Paldam, M. (2019). Has democracy decreased in the 21st century? P.t. available from:
  27. Piazza, J. A. (2019). Democratic skepticism and support for terrorism in the Palestinian territories. Public Choice, 178(3–4), 417–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Pitlik, H., & Kouba, L. (2015). Does social distrust always lead to a stronger support for government intervention? Public Choice, 163(3–4), 355–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Polanyi, K. (1944). The great transformation (Vol. 2). Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  30. Roemer, J. E. (1994). A future for socialism. Politics & Society, 22(4), 451–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Roemer, J. E. (2008). Equality of opportunity. The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 1–8, 1811–1816.Google Scholar
  32. Ruggie, J. G. (1982). International regimes, transactions, and change: Embedded liberalism in the postwar economic order. International Organization, 36(2), 379–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Schumpeter, J. (1928). The instability of capitalism. The Economic Journal, 38(151), 361–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schumpeter, J. A. (1942). Capitalism. Socialism and Democracy, 3, 167.Google Scholar
  35. Schumpeter, J. A. (1966). Imperialism: Social classes. Two Essays. Cleveland: Meridian Books.Google Scholar
  36. Streeck, W., & Livingstone, R. (2017). The return of the repressed. New Left Review, 104, 5–18.Google Scholar
  37. Tocqueville, A. D. (1835). Democracy in America, 1840. London: Saunders and Otley.Google Scholar
  38. Von Mises, L. (1977). Critique of interventionism. Ludwig von Mises Institute.Google Scholar
  39. Wu, G. (2017). Globalization against democracy: A political economy of capitalism after its global triumph. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University Paris 1 SorbonneParisFrance
  2. 2.Paris School of BusinessParisFrance

Personalised recommendations