Introduction This paper examines the extent to which socialism threatened the existing regimes of the late-nineteenth century. It focuses on two examples in the forms of socialism in France and socialism in Britain. It is argued that socialism posed more of a threat to the extant regime in France, though ultimately did not succeed in radically revising the political, social or economic structures of either state. The differences in the interests of socialism in either country are noted and attributed to the differing histories and political cultures of France and Britain, being successfully subsumed into the parliamentary systems of either country before the end of the 19th century. The Rise of Socialism Although texts such as the Communist Manifesto emerged in the mid-nineteenth century (Marx & Engels, 1848) , socialism as an ideology had its roots in earlier forms of political radicalism. For instance, the European Enlightenment had brought about ideas that challenged the old order. In France, these ideas culminated in the French Revolution, which had overthrown the old social, religious and political structures of the ancien regime, demonstrating how radical ideas could threaten existing regimes prior to the rise of socialism. However, it was not necessarily the case that Enlightenment ideals constituted a challenge to existing regimes in all cases. For instance, in Britain the Enlightenment saw liberal ideologies take on a more conservative tone, influencing reforms such as religious tolerance and the extension of the political franchise rather than necessarily taking aim at the constitutional monarchy itself (Smith, 2014) . The development of socialism and the threat it posed to both Britain and France followed this trend insofar as it was not necessarily uniform across either case. Within France, a positivistic and materialist philosophy underpinned the development of socialism, with early theorists such as Henri de Saint-Simon seeking to understand the ways in which the various orders of French society could be reformed to contribute better to its economy (Judt, 2011) . As with Marxist historical materialism, French socialism took on a teleological reading of French history as a series of breaks with the past heading towards constructing a more egalitarian socialist society. This is reflected in the support of French socialists for causes such as the Paris Commune that sought to entirely revise existing political, social and economic structures. Socialism in Britain took on an altogether different approach to understanding how society might be bettered. Industrialists such as Robert Owen experimented with establishing ‘socialist’ communities that emphasised the welfare of residents and workers (Claeys, 1989) . In some respects, this did not seek to erode class structures but rather hearkened back to a pre-industrial era of paternalism among those who controlled capital, emphasising the responsibility of industrialists to their workers. British socialists of the late-nineteenth century, such as William Morris, also focused on labour relations, advocating a return to pre-modern workshop industries and handicrafts at the expense of mass production. It is notable that such movements did not require the complete revision of existing structures to accomplish but rather focused on modes of production and labour relations. As the following section demonstrates, this led to a more conservative socialism that posed fewer threats to the extant order than in France. Threats to Existing Regimes The threat of socialism to existing orders began to manifest in the late-nineteenth century. Previous revolutionary movements such as that of 1848 were based largely on liberal-nationalist ideologies and challenged the imperial powers of the Westphalian system without striking directly at their institutions (Eley, 2002) . This liberal and somewhat bourgeois socialism was to become replaced by the proletariat socialism of Marx and Engels, who advocated a revolutionary socialism designed to revise extant institutions. In France, the Paris Commune of 1871 reflected the zenith of socialism’s threat to the extant regime. Whilst the Second French Empire collapsed after France’s defeat in the Franco-Prussian War (1870–1871), socialist radicals such as Pierre-Joseph Proudhon had advanced ideas about achieving economic justice through establishing worker cooperatives that resonated with the ever-growing working-class population (Allen, 1952) . Likewise, the revolutionary socialist Louis Auguste Blanqui advocated overthrowing the bourgeois state altogether, contributing to worker unrest across the late-1860s (Greene, 2017) . The collapse of the Second Empire therefore saw socialists exploit a power vacuum to establish the Paris Commune. This saw a socialist-inspired government take control of the capital and aim at instituting a number of reforms, including workers’ control of the means of production, the separation of church and the institution of universal suffrage (Eichner, 2022) . Meanwhile, British socialism was arguably less diverse than its French counterpart but also less of a mass movement throughout the latter nineteenth century. It is perhaps notable that it was Engels’ Condition of the Working Class in England (1845) that struck a chord with English socialists more so than Marx’s Das Kapital (1867) or the Communist Manifesto (1848). This text emphasised the importance not of total revision of the existing socioeconomic structure of Britain, but rather the importance of workers’ rights and welfare (Hampden Jackson, 1966) . In this respect, the aims of socialists in Britain were not wholly distinct from that of political liberals and Christian reformers, with working-class socialists sharing cause in many cases with likeminded bourgeois liberals. The diversity in British socialism reflected this, being focused on movements such as utopianism and Christian socialism rather than the more radical offshoots that culminated in the Paris Commune. Although the above implies that socialism presented a threat to the regime in France but never in Britain, it may be argued instead that the threat posed by socialism was more easily countered through Britain’s traditions of reform over revolution. The earlier movement of Chartism was militant though it is arguable that the material grievances of British left-wing movements could often find a sympathetic ear among middle-class groups, who brought these grievances to bear upon government and policy. Comparatively, the French middle-class were largely hostile towards socialism and the latter did not encounter mainstream political success until after the failure of the Paris Commune. A more moderate socialism such as was the agenda of the Federation of the Socialist Workers of France was more reformist than revolutionary in its agenda (McAdams, 2019) . Although there remained debates about whether socialist parties ought to participant in government, these parties largely worked within the confines of the parliamentary system they criticised, and the French Third Republic would survive until the Second World War. Conclusion France and Britain provide examples as to how socialism impacted existing regimes differently in later 19 th century Europe. Within France, socialism as a movement had more radical aims and interests, capable of threatening the established regime in a country with a history of revolution. Comparatively, the relatively stable Britain saw its reformist traditions successfully soften the threat posed by socialism by incorporating its material complaints about workers’ welfare into its liberal and Christian reformist agendas. In this respect, socialism was a distinct proposition in either country, evolving to meet the political temperaments of either society and mediated by their histories of reform and revolution. Though socialism posed a clearer threat to the status quo in France in 1871, it ultimately failed to revise the nature of the state or society in either case, reflecting the limited threat posed by even fairly radical and organised forms of socialism in the later nineteenth century. References Allen, M., 1952. P.J. Proudhon in the Revolution of 1848. The Journal of Modern History , 24(1), pp. 1-14. Claeys, G., 1989. Citizens and Saints. Politics and Anti-Politics in Early British Socialism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Eichner, C., 2022. The Paris Commune: A Brief History. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press. Eley, G., 2002. Forging Democracy: The History of the Left in Europe, 1850-2000. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Greene, D., 2017. Communist Insurgent: Blanqui's Politics of Revolution. Chicago: Haymarket Books. Hampden Jackson, J., 1966. Marx, Proudhon and European Socialism. London: Collier Books. Judt, T., 2011. Marxism and the French Left. Studies in Labour and Politics of France, 1830-1981. New York: New York University Press. Marx, K. & Engels, F., 1848. Manifesto of the Communist Party. Moscow: Progress Publishers. McAdams, A., 2019. Vanguard of the Revolution: The Global Idea of the Communist Party. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Smith, S., 2014. The Oxford Handbook of the History of Communism. Oxford : Oxford University Press.