What do you think?
Rate this book
The Future of Socialism
It is impossible to think of the intellectual landscape of Britain today without recognising the power of Crosland's The Future of Socialism in all aspects of the political debate. Still relevant 50 years after it was first published, Crosland's masterwork was a radical reworking of the role of the post-war Labour Party. This book sets out the philosophy for the New Labour project and also contains the key for reviving the fortunes of the Party of the future. Also included is a piece by Dick Leonard, Crosland's Personal Private Secretary, who knew the radical philosopher well, and an afterword from Susan Crosland.
450 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1956
23 people are currently reading
384 people want to read
About the author
Charles Anthony Raven Crosland
10 books2 followersCharles Anthony Raven Crosland (sometimes known as Tony Crosland or C.A.R. Crosland) - British Labour Party politician and author.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
August 1, 2021
Dated but engrossing read, though painfully optimistic re: "the worst of capitalism is over". Very interesting and readable.
June 30, 2025
Anthony Crosland’s The Future of Socialism is not just a landmark text in British political thought—it’s a work that profoundly shaped the way I understand politics, justice, and the role of the state in creating a fairer society. First published in 1956, Crosland’s book remains startlingly relevant, and for me, it marked the moment where socialism stopped being an abstract ideal and became a pragmatic, moral commitment.
Crosland’s central argument—that socialism must move beyond public ownership and towards greater equality and social justice within the framework of a mixed economy—spoke directly to my own evolving values. His rejection of dogmatic Marxism in favour of a democratic, reformist socialism gave me a political language that felt both idealistic and grounded. He argued that with the right social democratic policies—progressive taxation, strong public services, education reform, and cultural investment—we could achieve genuine equality of opportunity. That argument didn’t just make sense intellectually; it felt right emotionally.
Reading The Future of Socialism taught me that socialism isn’t about state control—it’s about personal freedom, fairness, and dignity. Crosland believed in tackling inequality not for its own sake, but because an unequal society corrodes democracy, fosters resentment, and wastes human potential. This perspective has had a lasting impact on how I see issues like education, welfare, housing, and even culture—not just as technical policy areas, but as moral battlegrounds.
More than any other political thinker, Crosland shaped my belief that politics must be about people’s everyday lives—about the quality of their housing, their ability to access education, the richness of their cultural experience, and the dignity of their work. His optimistic view of what social democracy could achieve helped me hold onto hope during moments when politics felt bleak or cynical.
Crosland wasn’t naïve. He knew power mattered, and he understood the importance of institutions. But his vision was always fundamentally humane. That, more than anything, is what stayed with me: the idea that socialism, at its best, is a moral force rooted in compassion, decency, and the belief that we owe something to one another.
In short, The Future of Socialism didn’t just inform my politics—it crystallised them. It made me a democratic socialist.
Crosland’s central argument—that socialism must move beyond public ownership and towards greater equality and social justice within the framework of a mixed economy—spoke directly to my own evolving values. His rejection of dogmatic Marxism in favour of a democratic, reformist socialism gave me a political language that felt both idealistic and grounded. He argued that with the right social democratic policies—progressive taxation, strong public services, education reform, and cultural investment—we could achieve genuine equality of opportunity. That argument didn’t just make sense intellectually; it felt right emotionally.
Reading The Future of Socialism taught me that socialism isn’t about state control—it’s about personal freedom, fairness, and dignity. Crosland believed in tackling inequality not for its own sake, but because an unequal society corrodes democracy, fosters resentment, and wastes human potential. This perspective has had a lasting impact on how I see issues like education, welfare, housing, and even culture—not just as technical policy areas, but as moral battlegrounds.
More than any other political thinker, Crosland shaped my belief that politics must be about people’s everyday lives—about the quality of their housing, their ability to access education, the richness of their cultural experience, and the dignity of their work. His optimistic view of what social democracy could achieve helped me hold onto hope during moments when politics felt bleak or cynical.
Crosland wasn’t naïve. He knew power mattered, and he understood the importance of institutions. But his vision was always fundamentally humane. That, more than anything, is what stayed with me: the idea that socialism, at its best, is a moral force rooted in compassion, decency, and the belief that we owe something to one another.
In short, The Future of Socialism didn’t just inform my politics—it crystallised them. It made me a democratic socialist.
November 13, 2022
Written in 1956 about democratic socialism in the Uk.
Labour had made real social progress post WW2, including the introduction of the following. The welfare state and national insurance, the NHS free at the point of entry for everyone, ignorance tackled by lifting the school age from 13 to 15, squalor was a top priority with massive expenditure in housing programmes and town planning, and lastly, idleness seemed a thing of the past with full employment a political priority.
Crosland argues that certain aspects of the old marxist disputes were no longer relevant and that a new vision was needed for the future.
His view was that Capitalism had been reformed from the horrors of the 19th century, the antagonisms between owner and workers had been reduced and checks and balances were now in place. The balance of power had shifted in favour of the workers with strong trade unions, shop stewards etc. A greater cooperation now existed between workers and management, and the traditional aspect of owners power, had been replaced with shareholders and management board structures.
He explains that further nationalisation is not needed, higher taxation or government fiscal policy can have greater effects for the better.
He advocates for greater equality, one instance he argues that is unjust, is unearned incomes. With wealth and estate being passed down to future generations in the form of a gift. Interesting that when this was written, inheritance tax and capital gains tax had not been introduced in Britain until the mid 1960s.
More work needed to be done on allowing talented children from working class backgrounds the same access to public schooling as kids from rich backgrounds. State comprehensive schools needed more investment to bring them up to the same standard as public schools.
How to accurately define socialism ? His definition is - "to treat each individual human being with dignity and respect, to allow them to reach there full potential within a strong supportive community." To achieve this, greater investment was needed in social services. Marxs definition of socialism was not desirable “ the ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange" Crosland argues that a mixed economy was a better option.
He goes in to great detail about class consciousness and that much work was needed in this area. How to define class ? - income, social prestige, employment , face to face power, accent, education - all factors to be considered.
Reading this in 2022, a lot has changed since 1956. Unfortunately, I believe for the worse. Democratic Socialism has been replaced by Neo Liberalism and has become the dominant ideology.
We now live under a global networked system of corporations and finance who ruthlessly exploit the world, with structural adjustments and unfair advantages. Financial markets now dominate public policy, and politicians merely act as managers of the economy unable to make any real social change. Mass democracy has been replaced by corporate lobbying, and society has retreated from the political arena into individualism. The balance of power now rests in the hands of a minority, industry has been outsourced to the developing world, trade union power has been decimated, nationalised industries sold off, the NHS is under threat of privatisation and a complete lack of social investment.
A fresh approach is needed today, the country is suffering after 12 years of Tory austerity.
A huge transfer of wealth to the rich through COVID has widened the inequality gap further and caused the economy to inflate close to bursting.
Maybe the incoming recession can be the agent of change to take us back to Democratic Socialism.
I hope so.
Labour had made real social progress post WW2, including the introduction of the following. The welfare state and national insurance, the NHS free at the point of entry for everyone, ignorance tackled by lifting the school age from 13 to 15, squalor was a top priority with massive expenditure in housing programmes and town planning, and lastly, idleness seemed a thing of the past with full employment a political priority.
Crosland argues that certain aspects of the old marxist disputes were no longer relevant and that a new vision was needed for the future.
His view was that Capitalism had been reformed from the horrors of the 19th century, the antagonisms between owner and workers had been reduced and checks and balances were now in place. The balance of power had shifted in favour of the workers with strong trade unions, shop stewards etc. A greater cooperation now existed between workers and management, and the traditional aspect of owners power, had been replaced with shareholders and management board structures.
He explains that further nationalisation is not needed, higher taxation or government fiscal policy can have greater effects for the better.
He advocates for greater equality, one instance he argues that is unjust, is unearned incomes. With wealth and estate being passed down to future generations in the form of a gift. Interesting that when this was written, inheritance tax and capital gains tax had not been introduced in Britain until the mid 1960s.
More work needed to be done on allowing talented children from working class backgrounds the same access to public schooling as kids from rich backgrounds. State comprehensive schools needed more investment to bring them up to the same standard as public schools.
How to accurately define socialism ? His definition is - "to treat each individual human being with dignity and respect, to allow them to reach there full potential within a strong supportive community." To achieve this, greater investment was needed in social services. Marxs definition of socialism was not desirable “ the ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange" Crosland argues that a mixed economy was a better option.
He goes in to great detail about class consciousness and that much work was needed in this area. How to define class ? - income, social prestige, employment , face to face power, accent, education - all factors to be considered.
Reading this in 2022, a lot has changed since 1956. Unfortunately, I believe for the worse. Democratic Socialism has been replaced by Neo Liberalism and has become the dominant ideology.
We now live under a global networked system of corporations and finance who ruthlessly exploit the world, with structural adjustments and unfair advantages. Financial markets now dominate public policy, and politicians merely act as managers of the economy unable to make any real social change. Mass democracy has been replaced by corporate lobbying, and society has retreated from the political arena into individualism. The balance of power now rests in the hands of a minority, industry has been outsourced to the developing world, trade union power has been decimated, nationalised industries sold off, the NHS is under threat of privatisation and a complete lack of social investment.
A fresh approach is needed today, the country is suffering after 12 years of Tory austerity.
A huge transfer of wealth to the rich through COVID has widened the inequality gap further and caused the economy to inflate close to bursting.
Maybe the incoming recession can be the agent of change to take us back to Democratic Socialism.
I hope so.
April 14, 2025
This book is a true gem, sadly so forgotten these days. It presents not just an argument for a pragmatic form of leftist politics that is relevant even now, almost 60 years after its publication, but also a great analysis of many aspects of public policy in Britain from the first principles. It oscillates between adorably archaic, through inspiringly aspirational, to very relevant even now.
The core argument of the book is to draw a distinction between the means and the ends of socialism - which I must say he uses very loosely and even has multiple chapters dedicated to explaining. Socialism for Crosland is a strain of political thinking that cannot be precisely defined - but he very much argues against seeing it in its Eastern-European, totalitarian variety. For him it’s rather a living ideal, a set of values and principles that guide policy and politics towards a more just, equal and communal form.
Crosland argues against the blind following of one particular strain of socialist dogmas (which he analyses in great detail) - like nationalising for the sake of nationalising - and instead argues for a pragmatic approach in pursuing the core values of socialism which he defines primarily as the pursuit of equality and social mobility. Crosland is a pluralist, arguing for freedom of choice and expression in all aspects of personal and economic life while keeping his focus on dismantling the rigid classist structure of the British society of the 1950s.
Crosland believed in socialism 'not on paternalistic or totalitarian grounds, but as a means of increasing personal freedom and the range of choice.' Crosland believes in an economy and society that benefits everyone - where state-owned firms compete with co-operatives and private companies, because in the blood of the socialist, 'there should always run a trace of the anarchist and the libertarian, and not too much of the prig and the prude.'
Debates around nationalism loom large in the book and analysis, but the more important sections of the book are dedicated to public service reform. Although Crosland became later known, as the Education Secretary, for his policy of dismantling the grammar schools, The Future of Socialism does not treat them as harshly and argues more against public schools (arguing for a policy of forcing them to have a quota of non-fee paying places) and for the growth of comprehensives. In general, Crosland argues for moving towards treating people and the users of public services as individuals, not as classes or groups of people. And of course, to improve their quality, so that the differences between levels of income and wealth are not present in accessing them.
Another fascinating aspect of the book is the analysis of the time it was written in. The capitalism of 1950s Britain was a very different beast from the times we live in now - before the present-day level of financialization of everything, with much greater separation of ownership and control, nationalised industries such as steel, coal and railways and despite recent memories of shortages and rationing in the after-war period, a strong sense of the coming age of abundance - which was already present in the United States, which are always a fascinating reference point throughout the book (along with the socialist Sweden).
It is also a time before capital gains taxes (which Crosland argues strongly for, on a flat rate), large pension funds or the creation of modern international development aid.
The state was effectively running the economy, through regulations, National Boards and currency controls - and as is stressed at the beginning of the book, full employment and strong and competent Trade Unions meant that labour had much more power than a couple of decades prior, with much of the socialist dogmas of the interwar period about the cartoonishly evil aspects of capitalists and capitalism no longer being valid. While there are parts where Crosland had to argue for growth and greater consumption (as large parts of the Labour or socialist movement were rather austere and puritanical), in the end, he eventually calls for a government-owned private equity fund!
There are fascinating quotes like 'No one of any standing now believes the once-popular Hayek thesis that any interference with the market mechanism must start us down the slippery slope that leads to totalitarianism.' Well, even in 2025, some people still do!
I have been fascinated by this book ever since I read about its influence on young John Rawls (which he read during his time at Oxford) in 'In the Shadow of Justice' by Katrina Forrester. There are parts and sometimes even literal passages that feel proto-Rawlsian, such an emphasis on the importance of dignity and respect in debates around pursuing greater equality or in various parts where he stresses that ability being a chance factor, it should be rewarded only as much as it benefits the society as a whole. In 1956! The difference principle before Rawls!
There is even a debate about meritocracy, thanks to Crosland's early debates with Michael Young, which is effectively the same argument made by Michael Sandel, half a century later.
Although Crosland and his arguments can seem a bit technocratic, the opposite is true - this book is grounded in socialist, leftist and communitarian values, from William Morris, through Fabians to the legacy of Keir Hardie. And the whole of conclusion is dedicated to the need to finance beautification and the arts (Crosland even argues for longer opening hours of pubs - a timeless concern!). Interestingly enough in his argument for curated and beautiful public space he praises the Town and Country Planning Act of 1947, which is now Blaine’s by a lot of policy thinkers on the right in creating extreme barriers for development. The book finishes with a sentence that I always thought was written by John Kenneth Galbraith or Keynes, but seems to be from the one and only, Tony Crosland; ‘We do not want to enter the age of abundance, only to find that we have lost the values which might teach us how to enjoy it.’
So much of this book is fascinating even in itself, not just as a historical record. The Future of Socialism and Anthony Crosland to a large extent created the intellectual grounding for the Revisionist stream within the parliamentary and political Labour party - and one sees the impact on later movements like New Labour not just in Crosland's emphasis on the importance of public services. It is terribly sad that both Crosland as well as Hugh Gaitskell died so young and before they were able to pursue this moderate and pragmatic approach fully in a Labour government.
The core argument of the book is to draw a distinction between the means and the ends of socialism - which I must say he uses very loosely and even has multiple chapters dedicated to explaining. Socialism for Crosland is a strain of political thinking that cannot be precisely defined - but he very much argues against seeing it in its Eastern-European, totalitarian variety. For him it’s rather a living ideal, a set of values and principles that guide policy and politics towards a more just, equal and communal form.
Crosland argues against the blind following of one particular strain of socialist dogmas (which he analyses in great detail) - like nationalising for the sake of nationalising - and instead argues for a pragmatic approach in pursuing the core values of socialism which he defines primarily as the pursuit of equality and social mobility. Crosland is a pluralist, arguing for freedom of choice and expression in all aspects of personal and economic life while keeping his focus on dismantling the rigid classist structure of the British society of the 1950s.
Crosland believed in socialism 'not on paternalistic or totalitarian grounds, but as a means of increasing personal freedom and the range of choice.' Crosland believes in an economy and society that benefits everyone - where state-owned firms compete with co-operatives and private companies, because in the blood of the socialist, 'there should always run a trace of the anarchist and the libertarian, and not too much of the prig and the prude.'
Debates around nationalism loom large in the book and analysis, but the more important sections of the book are dedicated to public service reform. Although Crosland became later known, as the Education Secretary, for his policy of dismantling the grammar schools, The Future of Socialism does not treat them as harshly and argues more against public schools (arguing for a policy of forcing them to have a quota of non-fee paying places) and for the growth of comprehensives. In general, Crosland argues for moving towards treating people and the users of public services as individuals, not as classes or groups of people. And of course, to improve their quality, so that the differences between levels of income and wealth are not present in accessing them.
Another fascinating aspect of the book is the analysis of the time it was written in. The capitalism of 1950s Britain was a very different beast from the times we live in now - before the present-day level of financialization of everything, with much greater separation of ownership and control, nationalised industries such as steel, coal and railways and despite recent memories of shortages and rationing in the after-war period, a strong sense of the coming age of abundance - which was already present in the United States, which are always a fascinating reference point throughout the book (along with the socialist Sweden).
It is also a time before capital gains taxes (which Crosland argues strongly for, on a flat rate), large pension funds or the creation of modern international development aid.
The state was effectively running the economy, through regulations, National Boards and currency controls - and as is stressed at the beginning of the book, full employment and strong and competent Trade Unions meant that labour had much more power than a couple of decades prior, with much of the socialist dogmas of the interwar period about the cartoonishly evil aspects of capitalists and capitalism no longer being valid. While there are parts where Crosland had to argue for growth and greater consumption (as large parts of the Labour or socialist movement were rather austere and puritanical), in the end, he eventually calls for a government-owned private equity fund!
There are fascinating quotes like 'No one of any standing now believes the once-popular Hayek thesis that any interference with the market mechanism must start us down the slippery slope that leads to totalitarianism.' Well, even in 2025, some people still do!
I have been fascinated by this book ever since I read about its influence on young John Rawls (which he read during his time at Oxford) in 'In the Shadow of Justice' by Katrina Forrester. There are parts and sometimes even literal passages that feel proto-Rawlsian, such an emphasis on the importance of dignity and respect in debates around pursuing greater equality or in various parts where he stresses that ability being a chance factor, it should be rewarded only as much as it benefits the society as a whole. In 1956! The difference principle before Rawls!
There is even a debate about meritocracy, thanks to Crosland's early debates with Michael Young, which is effectively the same argument made by Michael Sandel, half a century later.
Although Crosland and his arguments can seem a bit technocratic, the opposite is true - this book is grounded in socialist, leftist and communitarian values, from William Morris, through Fabians to the legacy of Keir Hardie. And the whole of conclusion is dedicated to the need to finance beautification and the arts (Crosland even argues for longer opening hours of pubs - a timeless concern!). Interestingly enough in his argument for curated and beautiful public space he praises the Town and Country Planning Act of 1947, which is now Blaine’s by a lot of policy thinkers on the right in creating extreme barriers for development. The book finishes with a sentence that I always thought was written by John Kenneth Galbraith or Keynes, but seems to be from the one and only, Tony Crosland; ‘We do not want to enter the age of abundance, only to find that we have lost the values which might teach us how to enjoy it.’
So much of this book is fascinating even in itself, not just as a historical record. The Future of Socialism and Anthony Crosland to a large extent created the intellectual grounding for the Revisionist stream within the parliamentary and political Labour party - and one sees the impact on later movements like New Labour not just in Crosland's emphasis on the importance of public services. It is terribly sad that both Crosland as well as Hugh Gaitskell died so young and before they were able to pursue this moderate and pragmatic approach fully in a Labour government.
September 6, 2014
I can see why this book was groundbreaking when it was first published. It is also a reminder of how much has changed in the intervening 63 years since it was first published. So many things that Crosland takes for granted (for example, he assumes that capitalism has been tamed) are no longer applicable. I think the value of this book lies in reminding those on the Left of what once was and what principles should be underlying any movement back to the left in order undo neoliberalism. This book is a reminder that we have a long way in this regard to go ...
January 13, 2025
A great, almost wonderfully fantastical, depiction of the ideal which can be pursued through his newly restated principles of socialism. Importantly, separating the ends and means of previous socialist doctrine and providing incontrovertible logic and historic precedent to display the reader with what then becomes an obvious and foolishly avoided state of society. The redistribution of wealth, the nationalization of essential sectors (health and education), the evil of unearned increment, minimizing both social and economic resentment, feeding from the efficiency of capitalist allocations, and (my favorite) a stern reminder to not forget the beauty, quality and culture that are the true fruits of our labor and the ultimate end goal of any society beset by abundance.
However, I think his thoughts were conjured under much more politically optimistic times, and I would warn against his tendency to paint a persistent rosy picture whereupon all things trend in the right direction. There is always negative pressure by some to accumulate beyond what is conceivably necessary and a mind-warping desire to exercise their advantage upon their fellow countrymen. It is up to the common man to realize these opponents and strike them down before they have collected the tools of enslavement. That is, yet another honorable objective any reputable state.
However, I think his thoughts were conjured under much more politically optimistic times, and I would warn against his tendency to paint a persistent rosy picture whereupon all things trend in the right direction. There is always negative pressure by some to accumulate beyond what is conceivably necessary and a mind-warping desire to exercise their advantage upon their fellow countrymen. It is up to the common man to realize these opponents and strike them down before they have collected the tools of enslavement. That is, yet another honorable objective any reputable state.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
May 15, 2022
As a small c conservative on most issues I found this book illuminating in so many ways in understanding where the new Labour project effectively came from and it's change of course Vs a more traditional socialism.
It is a hard read in places but that in itself is no bad thing. As the author realised in talking about his subjects, any solutions wanted or not would be harder to achieve than many people would realise. Could any of our MPs today write a book like this agree with it or not? Doubtful. The only group that appears to be trying to find a new formula through our current issues like Tony does for 1956 are post liberals.
Looking at the society that has in large part come about from following the ethos of this book though I would how Tony would feel now about the final quote "we do not want to enter the age of abundance only to find that we have lost the values which must teach us how to enjoy it" (bit of an odd thing for him to end with given her said socialists should have a touch of anarchy about them). With a low fertility rate, high obseity rates, high marriage break down and high abortion rates it looks very much like we have and someone needs to address this asap.
It is a hard read in places but that in itself is no bad thing. As the author realised in talking about his subjects, any solutions wanted or not would be harder to achieve than many people would realise. Could any of our MPs today write a book like this agree with it or not? Doubtful. The only group that appears to be trying to find a new formula through our current issues like Tony does for 1956 are post liberals.
Looking at the society that has in large part come about from following the ethos of this book though I would how Tony would feel now about the final quote "we do not want to enter the age of abundance only to find that we have lost the values which must teach us how to enjoy it" (bit of an odd thing for him to end with given her said socialists should have a touch of anarchy about them). With a low fertility rate, high obseity rates, high marriage break down and high abortion rates it looks very much like we have and someone needs to address this asap.
November 5, 2022
If I were recommending young leftists what to read, I’d be reluctant to offer them the works of Marx, Lenin, or Proudhon. Although the language (used in those books) was evocative - not to mention the intellectual capital those authors carried with them - The Future Of Socialism serves an instrument in how to achieve the redistribution of wealth both as a practicality and a rationality. Crosland’s reasoning for his disapproval of monopolies - more so state monopolies - should serve as an instrument to the contemporary leftist, especially in Britain. A great book by a man who was ahead of his time
June 22, 2013
5/5
Classic political literature. Anthony Crosland with this book became the new Bernstein of the socialist political left.
A must read, a book which convinced me to become a Keynesian Croslandite socialist democrat.
Classic political literature. Anthony Crosland with this book became the new Bernstein of the socialist political left.
A must read, a book which convinced me to become a Keynesian Croslandite socialist democrat.
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews