The victory of universalist, egalitarian social reform in Britain and Scandinavia was, in appearance, a tough act to follow. Nor did the Continental countries succeed. Social Democrats in Germany may have emblazoned Beveridgean ideals of welfare reform on their banners, and the political consensus forged within the French Resistance may initially have united the two parties of the left with the Christian Democrats in support of solidaristic initiatives. But all to no avail. In bloom elsewhere, reform on the Continent was barren. The forces behind the new vision were not powerful enough to overcome the resistance mounted from the bourgeois camp. Because the left in Germany never gained control and, in France, possessed it undiluted for only a brief period, reform similar to that following from Labour's six-year reign or from the Social Democrats' rule in Scandinavia was not possible here.

Such are the contrasts often drawn between successful solidaristic reform in Britain and Scandinavia and its failure on the Continent. Yet, in fact, when examined more closely these two sets of events turn out to have been so different that it is difficult to make useful comparisons between them. Anglo-Scandinavian initiatives, far from being the unilateral demand of the left, successfully imposed on the bourgeois parties, in fact reflected the formulation of a new middle-class interest in social policy.