ABSTRACT
Disagreement concerning the status of private property in productive resources has been the point of contention for distinguishing the ideological, theoretical, and policy dimensions of the three great philosophical-political movements of modern history: liberalism, socialism, and social democracy. More than any other policy dimensions associated with left politics and social democracy – progressive taxation, the welfare state, state provision of education, housing, etc., all of which have over time generated cross-party support, becoming in effect “valence” issues –the political struggle concerning the institution of private property in productive resources has differentiated the far left from the moderate social democratic left from the liberal and libertarian right. The implications of this struggle for democracy are decisive, and this chapter will highlight that aspect. Wolfgang Streeck (2014, 40-41) calls attention to the contemporary relevance of this problem with respect to the 2008 global economic crisis and its ongoing consequences:
Capitalism and democracy had long been considered adversaries, until the postwar settlement seemed to have accomplished their reconciliation. . . . Today, however, doubts about the compatibility of a capitalist economy with a democratic polity have powerfully returned. . . . The legitimacy of postwar democracy was based on the premise that states had a capacity to intervene in markets and correct their outcomes in the interest of citizens. Decades of rising inequality have cast doubt on this. . . . Egalitarian democracy, regarded under Keynesianism as economically productive, is considered a drag on efficiency under contemporary Hayekianism, where growth is to derive from insulation of markets – and of the cumulative advantage they entail – against redistributive political distortions.
