Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
SpringerLink
Log in

The Nature of Social Democracy and the Labour Party

  • Chapter
Economic Strategy and the Labour Party

Abstract

Since its formation in 1900 the British Labour party has been firmly rooted in the social democratic tradition. The majority of its leading members, political commentators and labour historians have taken Labour to be a social democratic party. Yet there is no agreement as to what the social democratic tradition precisely amounts and therefore no agreed ‘yardstick’ with which to analyse Labour’s strategy and achievements. Likewise, there is no agreement about the nature of Labour itself and the distribution of power inside it. Instead academics and others have differed in their interpretation of how the party’s constitution operates.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. These two typologies are not intended to be either exhaustive or all-inclusive — though much of the literature concerning social democracy and Labour can be found within their categories. My objective is to establish a setting within which to locate subsequent analysis. I do not think Labour’s present social democratic commitments can be found within this framework — as I make clear in the epilogue.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Adam Przeworski, Capitalism and Social Democracy (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1985), p. 3.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  3. Gøsta Esping-Andersen, Politics Against Markets (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1985), p. 10. He suggests that reforms will cumulatively be transformative.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Stephen Padgett and William Paterson, A History of Social Democracy in Post War Europe (London, Longman, 1992), p. 1.

    Google Scholar 

  5. For discussions of Revisionism see Geoff Foote, The Labour Party’s Political Thought A History (London, Croom Helm, 1985), pp. 193–234;

    Google Scholar 

  6. Stephen Haseler, The Gaitskellites (London, Macmillan, 1969), pp. 61–97;

    Book  Google Scholar 

  7. David Howell, British Social Democracy (London, Croom Helm, 1976) pp. 191–4;

    Google Scholar 

  8. David Lipsey and Dick Leonard (eds), The Socialist Agenda Crosland’s Legacy (London, Jonathan Cape, 1981);

    Google Scholar 

  9. John Mackintosh, Parliament and Social Democracy (London, Longman, 1982), pp. 222–32;

    Google Scholar 

  10. David Marquand, The Progressive Dilemma (London, Heinemann, 1991), pp. 166–78;

    Google Scholar 

  11. and Alan Warde, Consensus and Beyond (Manchester, Manchester University Press, 1982), pp. 43–74.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Anthony Crosland, The Future of Socialism (London, Jonathan Cape, 1964, originally 1956);

    Google Scholar 

  13. Anthony Crosland, ‘The Transition from Capitalism’, in Richard Crossman (ed.), New Fabian Essays (London, Dent, 1970, originally 1952), pp. 33–68;

    Google Scholar 

  14. Anthony Crosland, The Conservative Enemy (London, Jonathan Cape, 1962);

    Google Scholar 

  15. and Anthony Crosland, ‘The Private and Public Corporation in Great Britain’, in E. Mason (ed.), The Corporation in Modern Society (Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1960), pp. 260–76.

    Google Scholar 

  16. A detailed account of Crosland’s political thought is contained in Andrew Martin, ‘The Revision of Gradualist Socialism: C. A. R. Crosland and the Ideology of the British Labour Party’ (Columbia University PhD thesis, 1967). Crosland was a Labour MP from 1950–55 and 1959–1977.

    Google Scholar 

  17. R. Crossman (ed.), New Fabian Essays; and Socialist Union, Twentieth Century Socialism (Harmondsworth, Penguin, 1956). Both the Fabian Society and Socialist Union promoted Revisionist ideas within the Labour party.

    Google Scholar 

  18. On the development of Revisionist thought and disagreements between its theorists see Nicholas Ellison, Egalitarian Thought and Labour Politics (London, Routledge, 1994), pp. 73–108.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  19. Douglas Jay, The Socialist Case (London, Faber and Faber, 1937);

    Google Scholar 

  20. and Evan Durbin, The Politics of Democratic Socialism (London, Labour Book Service, 1940).

    Google Scholar 

  21. See Elizabeth Durbin, New Jerusalems The Labour Party and the Economics of Democratic Socialism (London, Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1983). Durbin became a Labour MP in 1945, Jay in 1946.

    Google Scholar 

  22. See Susan Crosland, Tony Crosland (London, Jonathan Cape, 1982), p. 67.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Socialist Union, Twentieth Century Socialism, p. 66.

    Google Scholar 

  24. There are surprisingly few references to Keynes in The Future of Socialism and it may be that Crosland (and others) came to take Keynesian economic policy for granted. See G. Arnold, ‘Britain: The New Reasoners’, in L. Labedz (ed.), Revisionism (London, George Allen and Unwin, 1962), pp. 299–312, p. 300;

    Google Scholar 

  25. and G. D. H. Cole, Capitalism in the Modern World (Fabian Tract 310, 1957), p. 18.

    Google Scholar 

  26. A. Crosland, The Future of Socialism, p. 316.

    Google Scholar 

  27. A. Crosland, The Conservative Enemy, p. 56.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Hugh Gaitskell, Socialism and Nationalisation (Fabian Tract 300, 1956), p. 11. See also A. Crosland, The Conservative Enemy, p. 56; and A. Crosland, ‘Burnham and the Managerial Revolution’, unpublished draft chapter 6 from The Future of Socialism, Crosland papers, 13/7,

    Google Scholar 

  29. A. Crosland, ‘Burnham and the Managerial Revolution’, p. 7.

    Google Scholar 

  30. A. Crosland, The Future of Socialism, p. 15.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Managers — unlike shareholders — would not be worried by increased taxation of dispersed profits: D. Jay, The Socialist Case, p. 266.

    Google Scholar 

  32. A. Crosland, The Conservative Enemy, p. 87.

    Google Scholar 

  33. A. Crosland, The Future of Socialism, pp. 29–32; and A. Crosland, ‘The Transition from Capitalism’, p. 38.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Socialist Union, Twentieth Century Socialism, p. 66.

    Google Scholar 

  35. A. Crosland, The Future of Socialism, p. 318. See also Austen Albu, ‘The Organisation of Industry’ in R. Crossman, New Fabian Essays, pp. 121–42.

    Google Scholar 

  36. H. Gaitskell, Socialism and Nationalisation, p. 7. See also Hugh Gaitskell, ‘The Economic Aims of the Labour Party’, Political Quarterly, 24 (1953), pp. 5–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Socialist Union, Twentieth Century Socialism, p. 127.

    Google Scholar 

  38. A. Crosland, The Conservative Enemy, p. 42.

    Google Scholar 

  39. A. Crosland, The Future of Socialism, pp. 319–33; and H. Gaitskell, Socialism and Nationalisation, pp. 23–9. See also W. A. Robson, Nationalized Industry and Public Ownership (London, George Allen and Unwin, 1960), pp. 133–5, 460–8.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Rita Hinden, ‘The Lessons for Labour’, in Mark Abrams and Richard Rose, Must Labour Lose? (Harmondsworth, Penguin, 1960), pp. 99–121, p. 119.

    Google Scholar 

  41. A. Crosland, The Future of Socialism, p. 324; and Mark Abrams ‘The Socialist Commentary Survey’, in M. Abrams and R. Rose, Must Labour Lose?, pp. 11–58.

    Google Scholar 

  42. A. Crosland, The Future of Socialism, p. 324.

    Google Scholar 

  43. A. Crosland, The Conservative Enemy, p. 43.

    Google Scholar 

  44. A. Crosland, The Future of Socialism, p. 341–3; and H. Gaitskell, ‘The Economic Aims of the Labour Party’, pp. 12–13.

    Google Scholar 

  45. A. Crosland, The Future of Socialism, pp. 257–62.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Socialist Union, Twentieth Century Socialism, p. 102.

    Google Scholar 

  47. A. Crosland, The Conservative Enemy, p. 225.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Anthony Crosland, The New Socialism (Melbourne, Dissent, 1963), p. 5.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Anthony Downs, An Economic Theory of Democracy (New York, Harper and Row, 1957).

    Google Scholar 

  50. A. Crosland, The New Socialism, p. 8. See also Anthony Crosland, Can Labour Win? (Fabian Tract 324, 1960), and M. Abrams and R. Rose, Must Labour Lose?.

    Google Scholar 

  51. See A. Crosland, The Future of Socialism, pp. 79–80; Evan Durbin, Problems of Economic Planning, (London, Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1949), pp. 4–13; Roy Jenkins, ‘Equality’, in R. Crossman (ed.), New Fabian Essays, pp. 69–90;

    Google Scholar 

  52. Socialist Union, Socialism A New Statement of Principles (London, Lincolns-Prager, 1952); Socialist Union, Twentieth Century Socialism, p. 61; and D. Lipsey, ‘Crosland’s Socialism’, in D. Lipsey and D. Leonard (eds), The Socialist Agenda Crosland’s Legacy, pp. 21–43.

    Google Scholar 

  53. A. Crosland, draft introduction to The Future of Socialism, Crosland papers, 13/9.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Key texts include Gøsta Esping-Andersen, Politics Against Markets; W. Korpi, The Democratic Class Struggle (London, Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1983);

    Google Scholar 

  55. and John Stephens, The Transition from Capitalism to Socialism (Chicago, University of Illinois Press, 1986, originally 1979).

    Google Scholar 

  56. For critical discussion see James Fulcher, ‘Labour Movement Theory Versus Corporatism: Social Democracy in Sweden’, Sociology, 21 (1987), pp. 231–252;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. G. Olsen, The Struggle for Economic Democracy in Sweden (Aldershot, Avebury, 1992), pp. 1–20;

    Google Scholar 

  58. J. Pontusson, ‘Behind and Beyond Social Democracy in Sweden’, New Left Review, 143 (1984), pp. 69–96.

    Google Scholar 

  59. J. Stephens, The Transition from Capitalism to Socialism, p. 71.

    Google Scholar 

  60. W. Korpi, The Democratic Class Struggle, p. 208.

    Google Scholar 

  61. J. Stephens, The Transition from Capitalism to Socialism, pp. 54 and 72.

    Google Scholar 

  62. W. Korpi, The Democratic Class Struggle, pp. 18–19. See also G. Esping-Andersen and W. Korpi, ‘Social Policy as Class Politics in Post-War Capitalism’, in John Goldthorpe (ed.), Order and Conflict in Contemporary Capitalism (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1984), pp. 179–208;

    Google Scholar 

  63. and E. H. Stephens and J. Stephens, ‘The Labor Movement, Political Power and Workers’ Participation in Western Europe’, Political Power and Social Theory, 3 (1982), pp. 215–250.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Gøsta Esping-Andersen and Roger Friedland, ‘Class Coalitions in the Making of West European Economies’, Political Power and Social Theory, 3 (1982), pp. 1–52, p. 45.

    Google Scholar 

  65. A similar theoretical framework is adopted by Peter Gourevitch, Politics in Hard Times (Cornell, Cornell University Press, 1986).

    Google Scholar 

  66. J. Stephens, The Transition from Capitalism to Socialism, pp. 50–51; and W Korpi, The Democratic Class Struggle, p. 21.

    Google Scholar 

  67. G. Esping-Andersen, Politics Against Markets, p. 22.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Conflict in society need be neither overt nor de-stabilising and periods of agreement may occur. They are not permanent.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Christopher Pierson, Beyond the Welfare State (Cambridge, Polity, 1991), p. 30;

    Google Scholar 

  70. and Andrew Martin, ‘Is Democratic Control of Capitalist Economies Possible?’, in Leon Lindberg et al (eds), Stress and Contradiction in Modern Capitalism (Lexington, D. C. Heath, 1975), pp. 13–56.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Rudolf Meidner, ‘Why did the Swedish Model Fail?’, Socialist Pvegister (1993), pp. 211–28, p. 218.

    Google Scholar 

  72. J. Pontusson, ‘Behind and Beyond Social Democracy in Sweden’, p. 72.

    Google Scholar 

  73. G. Esping-Andersen, ‘From the Welfare State to Democratic Socialism’, Political Power and Social Theory, 2 (1981), pp. 111–140, p. 113.

    Google Scholar 

  74. J. Stephens, The Transition from Capitalism to Socialism, pp. 146, 182–83.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Especially important as the potential bases for social democratic economic strategy were the various proposals in the mid-1970s for Scandinavian wage earner funds (associated with the Swedish economist Rudolf Meidner). Such funds would increase worker participation, restore economic growth by increasing investment, trade wage restraint for greater control of capital, and last, go beyond welfare state socialism and the problems it had encountered. See G. Esping-Andersen, Politics Against Markets, pp. 296–306; J. Stephens, The Transition from Capitalism to Socialism, pp. 182–92; W. Korpi, The Democratic Class Struggle, pp. 209–11. See also Rudolf Meidner, Employee Investment Funds (London, George Allen and Unwin, 1978).

    Google Scholar 

  76. See Francis Castles, The Social Democratic Image of Society (London, Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1978), pp. 124–31.

    Google Scholar 

  77. G. Esping-Andersen, ‘Single Party Dominance in Sweden: The Saga of Social Democracy’, in T. J. Pempel (ed.), Uncommon Democracies (Cornell, Cornell University Press, 1990), pp. 33–57, pp. 48–9; and J. Pontusson, ‘Conditions of Labour Party Dominance: Sweden and Britain Compared’, in T. J. Pempel (ed.), Uncommon Democracies, pp. 58–82, pp. 61–2.

    Google Scholar 

  78. See Michael Newman, John Strachey (Manchester, Manchester University Press, 1989), pp. 131–53.

    Google Scholar 

  79. John Strachey, Contemporary Capitalism (London, Victor Gollancz, 1956), p. 180; John Strachey, ‘Tasks and Achievements of the Labour Party’, in R. Crossman (ed.), New Fabian Essays, pp. 181–215, p. 188;

    Google Scholar 

  80. and John Strachey, ‘The Object of Further Socialisation’, Political Quarterly, 24 (1953), pp. 68–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Hugh Thomas, John Strachey (London, Eyre Methuen, 1973), p. 278.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Aneurin Bevan, In Place of Fear (London, Quartet, 1978, originally 1952), p. 23.

    Google Scholar 

  83. Przeworski’s fullest statement is Capitalism and Socialism Democracy. See also Adam Przeworski, The State and the Economy under Capitalism (New York, Harwood, 1990), pp. 92–6.

    Google Scholar 

  84. In recent work Przeworski has modified his stance: see Adam Przeworski and Michael Wallerstein, ‘The Structural Dependence of the State on Capital’, American Political Science Review, 82 (1988), pp. 11–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. For discussion see W. Higgins and N. Apple, ‘How Limited is Reformism? A Critique of Przeworski and Panitch’, Theory and Society, 12 (1983), pp. 603–30;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Desmond King and Mark Wickham-Jones, ‘Social Democracy and Rational Workers’, British Journal of Political Science, 20 (1990), pp. 387–413;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. and Duane Swank, ‘Politics and the Structural Dependence of the State in Democratic Capitalist Nations’, American Political Science Review, 86 (1992), pp. 38–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. See Adam Przeworski and John Sprague, Paper Stones (Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1986); and A. Przeworski, Capitalism and Social Democracy, pp. 24–35.

    Google Scholar 

  89. A. Przeworski, Capitalism and Social Democracy, pp. 133–70.

    Google Scholar 

  90. A. Przeworski, Capitalism and Social Democracy, p. 35.

    Google Scholar 

  91. A. Przeworski, Capitalism and Social Democracy, p. 40.

    Google Scholar 

  92. A. Przeworski, Capitalism and Social Democracy, p. 41.

    Google Scholar 

  93. A. Przeworski, Capitalism and Social Democracy, p. 42.

    Google Scholar 

  94. See Sven Steinmo, ‘Social Democracy versus Socialism: Goal Adaptation in Social Democratic Sweden’, Politics and Society, 16 (1988), 403–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. A. Przeworski, Capitalism and Social Democracy, p. 46.

    Google Scholar 

  96. Charles Taylor, ‘What’s Wrong with Capitalism’, New Left Review, 2 (1960), pp. 5–11, p. 11.

    Google Scholar 

  97. Ralph Miliband, Parliamentary Socialism (London, Merlin, 1972, originally 1961), pp. 356 and 373–4.

    Google Scholar 

  98. Ralph Miliband, Capitalist Democracy in Britain (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1982), p. 94.

    Google Scholar 

  99. David Coates, The Labour Party and the Struggle for Socialism (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1975), pp. 221 and 223. Coates talks of ‘limits that are rooted in the general requirements of capitalist private enterprise as a system’, p. 157.

    Google Scholar 

  100. D. Coates, The Labour Party and the Struggle for Socialism, p. 161.

    Google Scholar 

  101. R. Miliband, Parliamentary Socialism, p. 356.

    Google Scholar 

  102. D. Howell, British Social Democracy, p. 298.

    Google Scholar 

  103. Leo Panitch, Social Democracy and Industrial Militancy (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1976), p. 236.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  104. See also Leo Panitch, Working Class Politics in Crisis (London, Verso, 1986).

    Google Scholar 

  105. L. Panitch, Social Democracy and Industrial Militancy, p. 238.

    Google Scholar 

  106. Ralph Miliband, ‘The Politics of Contemporary Capitalism’, New Reasoner, 5 (1958), pp 39–52, p. 46.

    Google Scholar 

  107. See, for example, Clause VII (1), LPACR (1979), p. 468; and Clement Attlee, The Labour Party in Perspective (London, Left Book Club, 1937), p. 93.

    Google Scholar 

  108. Clause IX (1), LPACR (1979), p. 469.

    Google Scholar 

  109. Robert McKenzie, British Political Parties (London, Heinemann, 1967, originally 1955).

    Google Scholar 

  110. See also Dennis Kavanagh, Politics and Personalities (London, Macmillan, 1990), pp. 16–39;

    Book  Google Scholar 

  111. and Henry Drucker, Doctrine and Ethos in the Labour Party (London, George Allen and Urwin, 1978), pp. 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  112. R. McKenzie, British Political Parties, p. 455.

    Google Scholar 

  113. See Lewis Minkin, The Labour Party Conference (Manchester, Manchester University Press, 1980).

    Google Scholar 

  114. See L. Minkin, The Labour Party Conference, pp. 85–93.

    Google Scholar 

  115. R. Michels, Political Parties (New York, Free Press, 1968, originally 1911), pp. 81–106.

    Google Scholar 

  116. R. McKenzie, British Political Parties, pp. 313, 423–5, 490–2, 510.

    Google Scholar 

  117. R. McKenzie, British Political Parties, p. 597.

    Google Scholar 

  118. R. Michels, Political Parties, p. 70, see also pp. 61–80 and 107–14.

    Google Scholar 

  119. L. Minkin, The Labour Party Conference, pp. 66–81, 141–6, 239–41.

    Google Scholar 

  120. R. McKenzie, British Political Parties, pp. 414–6.

    Google Scholar 

  121. R. McKenzie, British Political Parties, p. 527.

    Google Scholar 

  122. R. McKenzie, British Political Parties, p. 570.

    Google Scholar 

  123. L. Minkin, The Labour Party Conference; and Lewis Minkin, The Contentions Alliance Trade Unions and the Labour Party (Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press, 1991);

    Google Scholar 

  124. and Samuel Beer, Modern British Politics (London, Faber and Faber, 1965).

    Google Scholar 

  125. See also Samuel Finer, The Changing British Party System 1945–1979 (Washington, AEI, 1980)

    Google Scholar 

  126. and Martin Harrison, Trade Unions and the Labour Party since 1945 (London, George Allen and Unwin, 1960), pp. 335–8.

    Google Scholar 

  127. L. Minkin, The Labour Party Conference, pp. 53–5.

    Google Scholar 

  128. A central theme of L. Minkin, The Contentious Alliance.

    Google Scholar 

  129. L. Minkin, The Labour Party Conference, pp. 24–5.

    Google Scholar 

  130. L. Minkin, The Labour Party Conference, p. 146.

    Google Scholar 

  131. Minkin’s analysis predates the recent reform to constituency parties voting procedure for the NEC.

    Google Scholar 

  132. S. Finer, The Changing British Party System 1945–1979, p. 79.

    Google Scholar 

  133. R. Crossman, New Statesman, 23 June 1961, p. 1010.

    Google Scholar 

  134. S. Beer, Modern British Politics, p. 188. See also R. McKenzie and S. Beer, ‘Book Section — Debate’, Parliamentary Affairs, 19 (1967), pp. 373–84.

    Google Scholar 

  135. L. Minkin, The Labour Party Conference, p. 11.

    Google Scholar 

  136. L. Minkin, The Labour Party Conference, p. 53.

    Google Scholar 

  137. L. Minkin, The Labour Party Conference, p. 39.

    Google Scholar 

  138. L. Minkin, The Labour Party Conference, p. 50.

    Google Scholar 

  139. S. Finer, The Changing British Party System 1945–1979, p. 95.

    Google Scholar 

  140. L. Minkin, The Labour Party Conference, p. 52.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Bristol, UK

    Mark Wickham-Jones (Lecturer in Politics)

Authors
  1. Mark Wickham-Jones
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 1996 Mark Wickham-Jones

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Wickham-Jones, M. (1996). The Nature of Social Democracy and the Labour Party. In: Economic Strategy and the Labour Party. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230373679_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation