and possible alliances between like-minded parties. In the process, the
left–right metaphor took on its contemporary meaning, as a permanent
cleavage about equality, which is sufficiently open to be redefined
with time and allow shifting alliances, without losing its relevance as
a collective representation of the enduring conflict that divides de-
mocracies. More importantly, the left–right metaphor reached beyond
the French parliamentary arena, to define two perennial camps, two
enduring political cultures within French society.^35 Through the
socialist movement, this metaphor then spread more or less rapidly
throughout Europe and across the world.^36
The contemporary left–right division, then, is less a child of the
French Revolution than an offspring of democratic socialism. This
suggests that the defining issue is not democracy itself, or revolution
and change versus authority and order, but rather what was called
in the nineteenth century the “social question,” namely the issue of
equality. Norberto Bobbio, who considers the different definitions
that have been proposed for the left–right distinction, concludes
likewise that the contemporary opposition is a product of the late
nineteenth century and concerns equality. The left, argues Bobbio,
is “more egalitarian,” and the right “more inegalitarian.”^37 Bobbio’s
definition has been faulted for being essentialist but, as we have seen
above, this is a baseless criticism. A collective representation as power-
ful as this one must have an intelligible, enduring meaning. More
problematic, in our view, is the negative definition Bobbio gives for
the right, which he understands simply as less in favor of equality than
the left.
Consider once again the French republicans, who were gradually
pushed to the right by the socialists. As champions of the republic, of
universal suffrage, and of public schools, they certainly were not
against equality. They were pessimistic, however, about the possibilities
of changing society through public intervention, and more confident
in the potential of individuals in a society that would reward effort
and merit. “Undoubtedly,” recognized Jules Ferry, a republican pol-
itician who headed the French government in the 1880s, “the fight for
(^35) Gauchet, “La droite et la gauche,” pp. 416.
(^36) Ibid., pp. 446–47; Laponce,Left and Right, pp. 52–56.
(^37) Norberto Bobbio,Left and Right: The Significance of a Political Distinction,
University of Chicago Press, 1996, pp. 56 and 65.
16 Left and Right in Global Politics