As well as new policies, social democrats need a strong ‘demand-side’ perspective, which focuses on renewing democracy in the party, the local state and the community.

The electoral defeat of the German Social Democrats on 27 September was a disaster. The party slumped to its worst performance in the history of the Federal Republic, losing about forty per cent of its voters in the process. In the UK, the picture for the Labour Party is hardly less grim: the party has lost well over half of its members since it came to power in 1997, and – with a general election looming – has even fallen into third place (behind the Liberal Democrats) in some opinion polls. The political traumas of the SPD and Labour have resulted in a raft of political commentary – from Der Spiegel to the British Financial Times – speculating (as Ralf Dahrendorf did in the 1980s) on the ‘end of social democracy’.

Yet recent election victories for social democrats in Spain, Greece and Norway show that such speculations are inaccurate. In fact, many of the problems faced by social-democratic parties also threaten the centre right. In the German case, combined support for both ‘catch-all parties’ (the SPD and the Christian Democrats) has declined from a total of over 90 per cent in the 1970s to less than 60 per cent in 2009. Across Western Europe, membership of mainstream parties (centre-left and centre-right) has plummeted. We should therefore talk more properly of the retreat rather than the defeat (and certainly not the end) of European social democracy.

In their article ‘Building the good society’, Jon Cruddas and Andrea Nahles identify the key issue: the limits of Third Way/Neue Mitte (as articulated by Tony Blair and Gerhard Schröder), and the need to recast social-democratic principles in a way that is relevant to political, economic and social conditions today. From my perspective, social democrats should concentrate on revitalising democracy itself, by empowering communities, opening up party structures, and paying special attention to civic education.

Political parties in a changing world
The principle challenge faced by social democrats is the trend towards the individualisation of society in terms of values and life-styles. In this context, we have witnessed in recent decades the withdrawal of the state – and the rise of what Ulrich Beck calls the ‘risk society’ – and a creeping commodification of state and society. Citizens are now widely viewed as consumers, and public services are valued more for their economic performance than their contribution to social cohesion. These developments are worrying for democracy (as Benjamin Barber argues in his book Consumed), and they are particularly problematic for social democracy, because they transfer issues of citizenship from democracy to the economic sphere – towards a market society. Cruddas and Nahles argue that ‘solidarity creates trust’. Actually, in an individualised society, trust creates solidarity. So, social democrats must build from the bottom up if they wish to promote social-democratic values and support for social-democratic policies (for example stronger public services).

What about the challenge of globalisation? As Cruddas and Nahles explain, the Third Way was too ready to accept a one-dimensional, economic view of what Thomas Friedman has termed the ‘flat world’. Blair and Schröder argued that resistance to global economic forces was futile: in the face of globalisation Schröder told social democrats to ‘modernise or die’. This approach was either very naïve or very cynical (probably both). Globalisation is multi-directional: it does not predetermine the size of a welfare state (it can, for example, include the Scandinavian model), or levels of subsidies (it can include quite high levels of subsidy, as in a number of sectors in the US economy).

However, the Cruddas-Nahles paper does share in the ‘hyperglobalisation’ thesis – it exaggerates the importance of globalisation, and therefore the role of the European Union. It rightly argues for the EU to regulate financial markets and prevent the flight of capital (a ‘Tobin tax’ on short-term financial transactions would also be welcome), but wrongly argues for deeper integration in areas of social policy such as housing. The communitisation of social policy would take democracy further away from the people. Social democrats should regulate capitalism, not democracy.

Democracy and social democracy
The Cruddas-Nahles paper sets out a number of concrete steps for social democracy to take, but these are largely limited to issues of policy and governance (in Colin Hay’s terms, the ‘supply side’ of politics). Social democracy also needs a strong demand-side perspective, focused on rebuilding trust in communities, empowering local government, and creating new linkages with communities of party members and sympathisers.

Although the Third Way paid lip service to the communitarian idea of grass-roots democracy, the personalised and hierarchical leadership networks established by Schröder and Blair left little room for this approach. To rebuild political support, social-democratic party organisations must – as Willy Brand argued in the 1960s – ‘dare more democracy’: open up party structures and devote more resources to local (and online) communities. The Obama campaign of 2008 in the US showed in an innovative way how political socialisation might be achieved by moving beyond traditional party structures through use of the new media.

Finally, an important demand-side approach to social-democratic renewal is civic education. For social democrats, much more than the centre right (whose policies require less social solidarity and whose organisations require fewer members), this is central, because: (a) mass movements in the modern age require a population that is politically literate – to navigate and find common purpose in the information superhighway; and (b) for solidarity to exist (and social democracy to flourish) citizens need to understand relationships between the individual, society and the state.

Conclusion
To prosper social democrats must therefore:

(1) Build a distinctive identity and offer a new social contract to citizens;
(2) Devolve power from the centre of the party and the state (democratise and socialise);
(3) Promote political literacy through civic education to support these aims.