Rosanvallon's work deserves to be much more widely read in Anglophone countries, as it can be understood to be the political theoretical and historical complement to the economics of Thomas Piketty. (Notably, Arthur Goldhammer is the English translator for both.)

This book gives both a remarkably enlightening historical analysis of the decline of the welfare state and the egalitarian ideas which anchored it and a bold and clear roadmap for reviving those intellectual preconditions which can again animate a new form of equality that matches the challenges of the present, from climate change to emboldened xenophobia.

In “The Society of Equals” we follow the the idea of equality from its inception in the late 1700s, as a rejection of the privilege of nobility, to the current crisis of equality with steadily increasing wealth and income gaps between rich and poor, both on a national and a global level.

The book is divided into five parts. The first part discusses the “invention” of equality, and what it was understood to mean in post revolution France and America.

“One cannot understand the spirit of equality in the American and French Revolutions without recognizing this idea of the market as both an expression of liberty and a vector of equality. The market was seen as an institution of equality. The eighteenth century thus theorized the liberalism of reciprocity. … It was possible for such a positive view of the market to take hold in the eighteenth century because the Industrial Revolution had yet to do its damage. The idea of an emancipatory and egalitarian liberalism therefore made perfectly good sense.”

In the second part, the effects the explosion of inequality due to the rise of capitalism have on the egalitarian ideal are discussed.

"Between the advent of capitalism in the early part of the century and the first globalization toward the end, the egalitarian ideal was revised in four main ways:

1. The conservative-liberal ideology of the 1820s and 1830s was based on a minimalist legal reinterpretation of the egalitarian revolution. Its goal was to legitimate existing inequalities by linking them to the immorality of the proletariat or by naturalizing them.

2. Conversely, communism, which made its appearance in the 1840s, proposed a new rationalized communitarian society based on the elimination of competition, which was blamed for everything that had gone wrong. Communists understood equality as an instrument for building a unified, harmonious society.

3. The advent of the first globalization in the 1890s complicated matters. Protectionist nationalism emerged, pitting a definition of equality as homogeneity, based on xenophobia and defense of the nation, against the earlier revolutionary ideal of equality as a relation between individuals.

4. In America the idea of equality was radicalized in the form of racism, rejecting nonwhites from society in order to establish an imaginary equality among those who remained. Thus, the idea of democratic equality was perverted in four distinct ways, each of which represented a radical reinterpretation of the egalitarian principle. These pathologies would persist until the advent of the redistributive welfare state."

“The Century of Redistribution,” from the reforms of Otto von Bismarck in the late 19th century through the golden age of the social democracy ending around 1970, is the focus in the third part.

“The reforms that Otto von Bismarck introduced in Germany in the 1880s marked the beginning of a process that would ultimately transform the social landscape. In 1883, a system of compulsory health insurance was established, financed by a levy on workers and firms, and this was followed in 1884 by insurance covering accidents in the workplace. Old-age insurance was introduced in 1889, establishing the first compulsory retirement program. A Code of Social Insurance in 1911 extended this tripartite system. The inception of the German welfare state set off a veritable reformist fever throughout the Continent and, indeed, the entire industrialized world.”

Then, in part four, “The Great Reversal” is analyzed.

“With the collapse of communism and the evaporation of revolutionary hopes, the fears that had once driven reform dissipated. Memory of the shared ordeals of the past faded, and with it went the sense of heightened solidarity. Structural factors also played an important role. Three of these deserve to be singled out: the functional and moral crisis of institutions of solidarity; the advent of a new type of capitalism; and the metamorphoses of individualism.”

In the last part Rosanvallon discusses some of the new challenges of moving towards a society of equals in today's climate.

"In democratic regimes associated with the individualism of universality, universal suffrage meant that each individual had a claim to the same share of sovereignty as every other individual. In democracy as the social form of the individualism of singularity, the individual aspires to be important and unique in the eyes of others. Everyone implicitly claims the right to be considered a star, an expert, or an artist, that is, to see his or her ideas and judgments taken into account and recognized as valuable."

"The idea of equality must be reformulated in a way suited to an acknowledged age of singularity. The goal is to develop an “expanded political economy” of the social bond as a step toward a general theory of equality in all its dimensions. Only such a theory can provide a firm basis for reform."

The biggest obstacle to implementing more egalitarian politics in current society is deemed to be the felt absence of reciprocity.

“Today, the feeling that reciprocity has broken down is directed primarily at the two extremes of the social ladder. Some point to the fact that the wealthiest members of society contribute proportionally less than others to the collective effort and often find ways to exempt themselves from common rules, most notably in regard to taxation, either by way of specific legal deductions or because they can afford to hire lawyers and accountants to turn complex regulations to their advantage. But those at the bottom of the scale are also viewed with suspicion. The belief that they somehow receive benefits to which they are not entitled has spread insidiously. The welfare regime is deemed to be too generous or too indulgent, and its clients are accused of cheating to obtain benefits. Reality and fantasy have combined to create both a sociological problem and a political problem.”

The book ends with a broad outline of a conceptual approach to realizing a society of equals based on "plural equality." A hierarchy of properties based on their social importance is suggested as the basis of several projects of equalization. The goal is to find an equilibrium where "no individual considers himself to be in an irreversible or psychologically destructive situation of inequality in a multiplicity of dimensions." This may sound lofty and empty, but it really makes sense in context. I promise. Read the book! :)

Rosanvallon's work deserves to be much more widely read in Anglophone countries, as it can be understood to be the political theoretical and historical complement to the economics of Thomas Piketty. (Notably, Arthur Goldhammer is the English translator for both.)

This book gives both a remarkably enlightening historical analysis of the decline of the welfare state and the egalitarian ideas which anchored it and a bold and clear roadmap for reviving those intellectual preconditions which can again animate a new form of equality that matches the challenges of the present, from climate change to emboldened xenophobia.