Many expected that, as a result of the failure of finance capitalism and the consequent crisis of confidence, Europe’s political coordinates would shift to the left. The European elections – the first substantial political test since the outbreak of the crisis – have shown, however, that these coordinates have, if anything, shifted to the right.

Even if it is inaccurate to talk of a total loss of confidence in the Social Democrats in Europe, it is obvious that precisely in the traditional big social democratic countries and those in Scandinavia, social democratic parties have lost their appeal. Broad population groups feel threatened, socially, economically, culturally and politically. Social democratic parties are widely perceived as no longer able to guarantee social protection based on fairness. On the contrary, they are sometimes regarded as co-responsible for the new uncertain times. Besides economic worries, crime and immigration are among the ten most urgent problems identified by Europeans. On top of this, there is a lack of trust in democratic institutions, although this is often the expression of frustration with the dominant mode of politics.

In the wake of the crisis of finance capitalism, so far there has been no realignment or re-establishment of social democracy in Europe. Although, of course, there can be no question of throwing out the market economic baby with the bathwater of recent financial disasters, after a phase of crisis management (focusing on securing employment) in European capitalism, there will be a need to:

• rethink and regulate the scope and limits of the market economy in general and the role of the financial sector in relation to the real economy in particular;
• structure the social distribution of both risks and opportunities more fairly;
• reassess distribution issues with regard to their effects;
• bring issues of democracy back to the centre of the political stage: if the state will have less and less to do, what will be left by way of democratic participation?

Many see salvation once more in the nation-state. A renaissance of the European nation-state, however, is no longer capable of providing a solution to the substantial problems of a world characterised by new international power structures. Spheres of activity and regulatory competences require a European complement. Many social democrats still have problems with the European dimension. We therefore need more ‘European courage’ for social democratic answers to the challenges of globalisation in general and the current financial and economic crisis in particular. Globalisation will have a social future only by virtue of an active European Union. Social democracy needs more Europe, but Europe, in turn, needs more social democracy.

Against the background of the developments and uncertainties outlined here, the multitude of tasks must be managed in such a way that the social democratic movement can once again become a leading force in Europe. This entails:

• a clear social democratic ‘narrative’, expressing values and identities with which the party base can identify once more, as well as goals and policies which reflect the core concerns of social justice and social cohesion;
• a credible and persuasive political leadership based on a vigorous and democratic party, which is able to learn from previous periods in office and to renew itself while in office;
• making use of all the possibilities provided by the political culture and the electoral system against political opponents;
• a balance of activities which is skilfully implemented, substantial and communicated effectively (or, in periods of opposition, proving that the government party has failed to do this);
• the ability to mobilise strategic partners (above all, the trade unions); and
• the necessity, in a globalising world, of embedding national considerations in a European and international approach to strategy.

To this end, it is not sufficient to merely tinker with these problems and to be well-positioned only in some areas. The Swedish Social Democrats, for example, lost the last election even though they could point to both social and economic successes and there is a broad social consensus on the country’s welfare state. Decisive for political success is a party’s overall profile. Narrative, leadership, scope of action, balance of activities, partnerships and European/globalisation strategy must combine in one harmonious whole. At present, this could be said of very few of Europe’s social democratic parties.

The figure below – ‘Levers of political success’ – shows how individual social democratic parties are positioned in relation to the factors here described. We invite all participants in the debate to respond or to offer an alternative viewpoint. It is not so much a matter of identifying winners and losers as of using the analysis to set a dialogue in motion in the sense of mutual learning and the identification of best practice.