three - Egalitarian social democracy: ‘Is equality of opportunity enough?’

Summary

In Britain, equality of opportunity and social mobility, though they lead to the most admirable distribution of intelligence, are not enough. They need, not to be played down, as some sociologists would have us do, but to be combined with measures, above all in the educational field, to equalise the distribution of rewards and privileges so as to diminish the degree of class stratification, the injustice of large inequalities, and the collective discontents which come from too great a dispersion of rewards. (Anthony Crosland, 19561)

I came to hate and loathe social injustice, because I disliked the class structure of our society, because I could not tolerate the indefensible differences of status and income that disfigure our society. (Anthony Crosland, 19562)

Introduction: Crosland’s legacy and egalitarian social democracy

Crosland’s Future of Socialism inspired the debate in the postwar Labour party about the nature of equality. His revisionism involved a vigorous commitment to egalitarian social democracy: equality was at the front and centre of Crosland’s analysis. His work offered a reference point for what kind of equality mattered in Britain: equality of opportunity where all citizens could rise through the class and occupational structure as far as their talents would take them; and equality of outcome ensuring the distribution of disposable income and resources accords with fundamental principles of social justice. Since Crosland understood equality as the pre-eminent value, his views on egalitarianism are discussed extensively in The Future of Socialism. According to Dick Leonard, Crosland offered: ‘The most persuasive, eloquent and comprehensive presentation of the values of democratic socialism so far attempted’. Roy Hattersley insists that Crosland crystallised what equality ought to mean to the party: ‘We all believed the Labour party was about equality. Crosland gave substance to that by defining equality in an acceptable way. Tawney had talked about equality not being uniformity and encouraging diversity, but only Tony up to that point had given thought to the different forms of equality.’ His views have acquired additional significance since The Future of Socialism’s was published as more recent generations of Labour politicians have fought to acquire the Croslandite mantle. The chapter will address Crosland’s ongoing influence on British social democracy, and what equality ought to mean in today’s society. Despite arguments surrounding Crosland’s definition of equality, his influence on the party’s concept of egalitarianism has been profound.