#25 Why is the postwar period a model for the left and the (far) right?

These are edited remarks that I gave in a roundtable at Leiden University on “80 years of Peace in Europe” organised by Maxine David.

What is noteworthy about the post-war period (say 1945-1973) is that both the left and the far-right seem to like it. For many on the left, say people like Bernie Sanders, it is a "golden age" of rapid economic growth, social equality, and the construction of the welfare state in the West —a stark contrast to the high inequality of the present. But we find a similar yearning for this period on the right, and even the far right. When Donald Trump or JD Vance talk about making “America Great Again”, the idealized society they want to return to resembles the 1950s or 1960s: a less diverse society where white men were the undisputed cornerstones, industry was the pillar of the economy, women's primary domain was the home, and the rights of migrants and ethnic minorities were curtailed.

Each side tends to selectively focus on certain aspects. The left champions the economic solidarity and social safety nets, often overlooking the era's deep-seated exclusions. The right praises the perceived social order and traditional hierarchies, ignoring the economic infrastructure and state intervention that underpinned the widespread prosperity. But were the economic achievements of the post-war era in terms of equality inextricably linked to its exclusionary social and political foundations? Could one have existed without the other? Here I outline the architecture of that period, "embedded liberalism," to explore both its successes and the crucial limitations and exclusionary practices

The Architecture of Post-War Prosperity: Embedded Liberalism

The cornerstone of the post-war international economic order was "embedded liberalism". This framework aimed to harmonize domestic economic stability and objectives of inequality reduction with a liberal international system for trade and finance. In essence, it enabled nations to pursue domestic equality and interventionist policies while engaging in an open global economy. This system was substantially supported by the dominance of the US dollar and the economic and military might of the United States.

Unlike the laissez-faire liberalism of the 19th century, embedded liberalism was inherently multilateral yet predicated upon active domestic interventionism. Governments assumed greater responsibility for national social security and economic stability. Key institutions, such as the Bretton Woods system for monetary relations and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) for trade, were established to govern this order. These ...