Jump to ratings and reviews
Rate this book

In the Name of Social Democracy: The Great Transformation from 1945 to the Present

Rate this book
Following the locust years of the neo-liberal revolution, social democracy was the great victor at the fin-de-siècle  elections. Today, parties descended from the Second International hold office throughout the European Union, while the Right appears widely disorientated by the dramatic “modernisation” of a political tradition dating back to the nineteenth century.

The focal point of Gerassimos Moschonas’s study is the emergent “new social democracy” of the twenty-first century. As Moschonas demonstrates, change has been a constant of social-democratic the core dominant reformist tendency of working-class politic notwithstanding, capitalism has transformed social democracy more than it has succeeded in transforming capitalism. Now, in the “great transformation” of recent years, a process of “de-social-democratization” has been set in train, affecting every aspect of the social-democratic phenomenon, from ideology and programs to organization and electorates. Analytically incisive and empirically meticulous, In the Name of Social Democracy  will establish itself as the standard reference work on the logic and dynamics of a major mutation in European politics.

320 pages, Paperback

First published April 17, 2002

Loading...
Loading...

About the author

Gerassimos Moschonas

2 books1 follower

Ratings & Reviews

What do you think?
Rate this book

Friends & Following

Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!

Community Reviews

5 stars
6 (66%)
4 stars
2 (22%)
3 stars
1 (11%)
2 stars
0 (0%)
1 star
0 (0%)
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
Profile Image for Joshua.
32 reviews9 followers
Read
August 24, 2020
not very readable but theres a lot of good stuff in here. despite its faults its still one of the best things on the subject-- the transformation of social democratic theory and practice through the postwar era, with a particular focus post-1973 and into the 80s and 90s. dont agree with all his conclusions. and this is very much a work of political science rather than history. but good on the whole
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews