Paul Ginsborg’s prescriptions for the renewal of democracy are impressive, but disappointing in shirking some of the underlying factors behind the disaffection that plagues modern politics. There are two strands to Ginsborg’s analysis: he draws on case studies of participatory democracy that try to involve people in the decision making process, whilst embodying these in the context of the ideas of Marx and Mill.

Participatory democracy is given the heaviest emphasis: a transparent voting system and the fair election of politicians and representatives, elections being the only moment in the voting process when individuals are formally equal. At other times, there must be meetings of people to assess public opinion and translate it into workable measures: otherwise, the vote itself is meaningless. As the book develops, Ginsborg analyses how these participatory schemes might be applied in the workplace and other areas of public life, and he maintains a careful distinction between economic and political democracy while exploring how they might be fruitfully combined.

Marx and Mill provide more than an overview to the analysis, as Ginsborg considers how these two great thinkers might have viewed modern participatory democracy, often with entertaining results. The difference in their attitudes to ‘economic democracy’ is particularly clear, with Marx’s insistence on the need for proletarian revolution pitted against Mill’s more optimistic view of class as a movable obstacle. However, in the earlier parts of the book, it would be useful to have more discussion of the current political climate, to ascertain just why it’s so apolitical.

For example, a recurring theme is the idea that we have forfeited our rights to participate in democracy: by retreating into the private sphere, we have decreased the time we invest in the outside world. The tone is set by the words of Benjamin Constant, that on larger scales, democracy will take place on behalf of rather than by citizens, and men will instead be allowed ‘the enjoyment of security in private pleasures’. While this is undoubtedly true, it would be useful for Ginsborg to discuss the extent to which modern society is still built on this public-private divide. Ginsborg is right, for example, that families have the potential to produce active and dissenting citizens, but that ‘under consumer capitalism they are…overwhelmingly conformist and self-absorbed’.Ginsborg’s atomised conception of the family has rather Thatcherite overtones, but are we still in that same climate of neo-liberalism which compels individuals to devote all their energies to their own families in the private sphere? Some would argue the problem today is not the corrupting influence of the family, but its absence all together; people are increasingly individuals bereft of a network and a community to which they feel responsible. Indeed, Ginsborg’s proposed ‘system of connections’ implies communities deciding their priorities, but it is not clear whether this focus on inclusion would be provided by families or other institutions. Ambiguous points early in the book like this perhaps need more clarification.

In other places, Ginsborg discusses the limitations of the classical concept of parliament, where in the words of Mill ‘every person in the country may count upon finding someone who speaks his mind’, a view that as Ginsborg points out now looks rather naïve in the light of 150 years of analysis of socio-economic factors. However, in the same passage he talks of civil society as a project dating back to the Enlightenment period, and it would be useful if he could explain the distinction between the Millian view of parliament as the freest possible exchange of public opinion, and the Enlightenment view that citizens need a basic pre-definition of universal rights before the voting process begins. It is certainly pointless to put faith in any kind of parliamentary assembly if you do not have the faith that each individual will put their opinion under the scrutiny of others, and crucially, that they will allow others the free expression of their own views.

However, the problem with participatory schemes like electronic town meetings is that there is nothing in institutional terms to compel policy makers to respect the opinions of the temporary electorate. Clearly, such schemes fail because the views of the people are informed by different interests than those of the policy makers, and the former will always be subordinate to the latter. As a humble citizen participating in one of these schemes, you cannot have faith that every individual will respect your views, since those who make the final decisions are not accountable to you but instead to demands higher up, often set by even more unaccountable senior figures and private companies.

This is not true of all schemes; the case of Porto Alegre in Brazil is one which involves a new committee at each meeting, and allows people to elect their own representatives. This shows promise, but to have an impact on policy at anything but a local level remains rare. Perhaps there would be more progress if we could ensure citizens are empowered, reminded of their basic rights, or perhaps we need to redefine just what these rights are. However, there is little discussion at this level. Mill grasped that ideas had to be freely contended, but he did not envisage a scenario whereby decision makers and electorate sat in fundamentally different spheres. Unfortunately, this is the state we’re in (pardon the pun), and it can only be fully explained by taking economic conditions into account.

So, Ginsborg moves on to suggest how economic democracy might be achieved in spheres such as the workplace. As I noted earlier, the account of the distinctions between Marx and Mill in this chapter is one of the finest parts of the book. In particular, Marx’s essential point that, in becoming a producer of commodities, man loses control over the historical process, is brilliantly captured : ‘the worker was alienated…first from the product of his labour, which assumed the physiognomy of an alien object having control over him, rather than he having power over it’. Ginsborg brings to light several case studies of attempts to attain economic democracy in the workplace. The most interesting of these, worth mentioning, is a policy of collective investment funds which was considered in Sweden in the 1970s. this required company shares to be entrusted to regional management boards, based on how accountably they invested them in social priorities, with the aim of incentivising employees to work together for better working conditions. Schemes like this, it seems, would foster a culture in which worker had to negotiate rights themselves- of having direct control over the working environment, and is precisely the kind of outcome that schemes like the electronic town meeting have not so far attained. This is clearly not lost on Ginsborg: ‘In Millian terms, it leads to skilled and cultured representatives of the working classes, constantly present and active in the workplace’. However, this scheme had a limitation in Marxist terms: it does not allow workers control over the actual commodities being produced.

Indeed, having so well captured the point that control over nature, man’s ‘species-being’, is essential if man is to have any control over the course of his own history, Ginsborg unfortunately does not explore the possible relevance today. An underlying assumption throughout the book is one few would disagree with; the capitalism Marx documented in its infancy now continues to estrange us from political action. Although now, given the multiplicity of ways that we have control over our work, most of us cannot be considered the proletariat of the 19th century, talk of a revolution has lost much of its relevance. But even if we are not that proletariat, part of any agenda for the renewal of democracy should be to regain some control over the economic conditions that have forced us to take a passive role in it.

In the final chapter for example, Ginsborg gives a somewhat rose-tinted view of global civil society. Though the creation of social forums and think tanks on a global scale does open up ‘previously secretive and non-accountable spheres, and the diffusion on a mass scale of relevant information and documentation’, Ginsborg seems to see this as more of an opportunity than a problem: ‘the area of international governance is populated by the voices of diplomats, politicians and bureaucrats..but it is not an impenetrable or impregnable sphere’. The opportunities of global civil society are certainly there; there is hope that, particularly through the internet, citizens on a global scale are better able to mobilise themselves, set their own priorities. Politically minded citizens have been able to network and build think tanks, for example.

But in a global sphere which is dominated by public figures, can the interests of think tanks, and the criticisms it tires to affect, really penetrate the elite institutions of parliament and the EU? Or will they merely be used by self-interested politicians, and those with noble intentions becoming one of those self-interested politicians? Indeed, there is something profoundly Marxian about this idea; that criticisms of a political system can so easily become just another commodity. The media, as well as global democracy, is populated by politicians and often the views which sing their praises which ultimately find the greatest audience. In an indirect way at least, views are indeed affected by economic conditions, and global civil society today may well be a mouthpiece for the masses but it also pays lip service to the politicians and bureaucrats.

In summary, Paul Ginsborg gives much food for thought, but his proposals fall into two rigid categories; small-scale participative democracy in local, organised communities versus large scale global democracy in the form of movements and think tanks. The former allows communities to mobilise and establish some control over the process that represents them, but it is confined to small cross-sections of the electorate and crucially, their views have to penetrate the sphere of policy-making. These practices are atomised, and difficult to replicate in communities with different norms. Global civil society allows issues to be contested on a large scale, which represents a major leap forward. But these ideas are open to distortion by the media and public figures, undermining them before they reach their audiences. However, the book is not a comprehensive agenda and Ginsborg gives a creditable account of our options.