In various incarnations, egalitarianism has been a fundamental concern of economic policy for most of the twentieth century.footnote1 The egalitarian impulse—and its corollary, opposition to the stark inequalities of free market capitalism—was embodied in both Soviet-style socialism and social-democratic Keynesianism as they developed, primarily in the first quarter-century after the end of World War II. Both models achieved major successes in a range of countries, especially through the 1960s. Countries with Soviet-type economies attained high growth rates and the majority of people living in them enjoyed rising living standards, including income, job, health and housing security. The social-democratic/Keynesian approach also succeeded in reducing inequality, increasing security, as well as contributing to the dampening of the capitalist business cycle.footnote2
However, both models also contained several basic contradictions. Among the most evident were the dictatorial political foundations of the Soviet
Progressive political movements have been weakened by the absence of coherent egalitarian economic programmes. In this absence, progressive movements are unable to specify a broad-based policy agenda they support. Such a lacuna is especially damaging given that support for the Left has again begun to grow, as the full implications of Reaganism, Thatcherism, imf/World Bank structural adjustment programmes and Eastern European free-market shock therapy are no longer matters of speculation.
This paper pursues a new approach to egalitarian economic policy. It is concerned with methods of bringing dramatic increases in the democratic control over financial markets and the allocation of credit, without sacrificing the basic sources of micro efficiency and macro coordination and stability that are necessary for any viable economic strategy. The focus here on financial issues is not meant to suggest that there is less need for comparable policy measures in other economic spheres, in particular the labour market and related institutions. Nevertheless, the premise of this paper is that policies focused on financial institutions and activities must be a central feature of any renewed egalitarian policy project.
There are several reasons why this is so. To begin with, it has been clear for some time that even the most mildly progressive governments face formidable opposition to their programmes from powerful interests within financial markets. Some well-known examples of this recurring phenomenon include the Labour governments in Britain in the 1930s, 1960s and 1970s, the Mitterand government in France in the 1980s, and,