THE STEADY EXPANSION OF THE FUNCTIONS OF GOVERNMENT and its increasingly interventionist role in the economy has for much of the twentieth century seemed an inexorable and irreversible trend. The jurist, Dicey, already saw it as such at the beginning of the century. In a famous series of lectures, he traced the retreat of Benthamite individualist liberalism in the face of what he called ‘collectivism’. The common theme in all the developments he considered — the protection given to trade unions on the one hand, compulsory education and municipal trading on the other — was their limitation of the freedom of contract, the limitation of — the buzz-word of British politics in the late 1980s — ‘choice’.

AT THE END OF HIS REVIEW OF LABOUR MARKET RIGIDITIES in advanced capitalist societies, Ronald Dore presents us with the classical and highly uncomfortable dilemma between equity and efficiency. There are two kinds of rigidities, he suggests: those that improve economic performance while giving rise to social inequality and societal dualism, and those that promote equity while detracting from efficiency. Unlike neo-classical economics, Dore recognises that to be efficient, advanced production systems require institutions above and beyond the market — such as long-term employment, internal labour markets, and ‘sticky’ mechanisms of wage determination. But these institutions, he insists, are not, or no longer, defensible in terms of the Marshallian tradition of industrial and social citizenship. Social justice and equality, according to Dore, are vested today in a second type of ‘ridigities’ — the redistributive apparatus of the welfare state — which, unlike the first, extracts an ‘efficiency price’ from the economy.

‘SEEK, AND YE SHALL FIND’. YET IT IS NOT IMMEDIATELY obvious that the last decade has seen a remarkable revival of a specifically English tradition of democratic socialist thought. Most political writing in England, of course, has a bad press. I use ‘political writing’ in an obvious but also a special sense. By ‘political writing’ I mean serious writing about politics which is neither academic nor purely polemical. Sometimes it may be by academics, but then not academics writing for academics in a manner only comprehensible to academics; rather those books or articles which are written for a general public who take a serious interest in politics, whether directly or indirectly involved — say ‘literate citizens’.

THE POLITICAL CRISIS WHICH ERUPTED IN POLAND IN 1980 WAS widely attributed to the economic problems which beset the country then and subsequently. Economic conditions undoubtedly contributed to the crisis — but survey evidence suggests that gradual cultural changes were a less obvious but at least equally important factor. Historically, the Polish people have characteristically placed relatively great emphasis on self-determination and political freedoms. This traditional heritage has not grown weaker in recent years. Quite the contrary, it seems to have been reinforced by a gradual shift toward postmaterialist values among the Polish public.

An intergenerational shift from materialist toward postmaterialist priorities, already shown to be taking place in more than a score of Western countries, also seems to be occurring in Poland.

France is perhaps today the one European country about which it is most difficult to speak with any degree of accuracy. A phrase used by General de Gaulle during the events of May 1968 applies perfectly to France today, different as it is from France as it was then: ‘La situation est insaisissable’. (‘The situation is beyond our grasp.’) Let us recall the principal facts.

VIEWED FROM THE OUTSIDE WEST GERMANY SEEMS TO BE AN oasis of stability. The dullness of such a political system has been alleviated, however, by the rise of the Green and alternative movements. Why should Germany become a Mecca for the alternative movements, when so many scholars have testified over the years that its political culture tends to be legalistic, not conflict-oriented or tolerant of unconventional behaviour? Most observers from abroad have attempted to answer this question in terms of value change, motivational or economic crisis theories.

BRITISH READERS MAY RECOLLECT MARTIN'S POIGNANT expression of regret, in Voltaire's Candide, that the French and English had felt it necessary to go to war in North America over ‘quelques arpents de neige vers le Canada’. Martin captures the sense of an enduring European perception of Canada — an indeterminate expanse of ice and snow held firmly in winter's Arctic grip throughout much of the year. His sardonic utterance reminds us of the overseas rivalries of Canada's European parents out of which were born its historic ‘two solitudes’, its distinct linguistic and cultural communities, one proudly French, the other British in descent, their entwined affairs remaining persistently refractory long after the eventual emergence from its colonial past of present-day Canada.