Henry Mintzberg is a Canadian management professor who, in many ways, can be regarded as having inherited the mantle of the most insightful management writer Peter Drucker. He has the same integrity and clarity that the Austrian emigre brought and, as he has aged, has become increasingly critical of the excesses of modern capitalism and has produced a little book about this - "Rebalancing Society – Radical Renewal; beyond Left, Right and Center" (2015) which argued that we had got it wrong when we imagined that capitalism had won at the end of the 80s
It was balance that triumphed in 1989. While those communist regimes were severely out of balance, with so much power concentrated in their public sectors, the successful countries of the West maintained sufficient balance across their public, private, and what can be called plural sectors. But a failure to understand this point has been throwing many countries out of balance ever since, in favor of their private sectors.
And it was deindustrialisation which destroyed that balance – more specifically the power which working class people had been able to exercise in that period through votes and unions - has been undermined. In its place a “thought system” developed - justifying corporate greed and the privileging (through tax breaks and favourable legislation) of the large international company which I have summarised thus -
All political parties and most media have been captured by the “thought system” which now rules the world
People have, as a result, become cynical and apathetic
Privatisation is a disaster – inflicting costs on the public and transferring wealth to the few
Two elements of the “balanced system” (Political and legal power) are now supine before the third (corporate and media power). The balance is broken and the dominant power ruthless in its exploitation of the excesses to which it can now give vent
It is very difficult to see a “countervailing power” which would make these corporate elites pull back from the disasters they are inflicting on us
Social protest is marginalized - not least by the combination of the media and an Orwellian “security state” ready to act against “dissidence”
But the beliefs which lie at the dark heart of the neo-liberal project need more detailed exposure
as well as its continued efforts to undermine what little is left of state power
We need to be willing to express more vehemently the arguments against privatisation - existing and proposed
to feel less ashamed about arguing for “the commons” and for things like cooperatives and social enterprise (inasmuch as such endeavours are allowed)
But the elite - and the media which services their interests - noticed something was wrong only when Brexit and Trump triumphed – in 2016. But that was simply the point at which the dam broke – the pressure had been building up for much longer.
If we really want to understand what is going on we have to go much further back – not just to the beginning of the new millennium when the first waves of populist anger started - but to the 1970s when the post-war consensus started to crumble – as Anthony Barnett, for one, most recently argued in his superb extended essay “Out of the Belly of Hell” (2020)
The demos have been giving the Elites a clear warning – “your social model sucks”. So far I don’t see a very credible Elite response. Indeed, the response so far reminds me of nothing less than that of the clever Romans who gave the world Bread and Circuses. Governments throughout the world have a common way of dealing with serious problems – it starts with denial, moves on to sacrificial lambs, official inquiries and bringing in the clowns - and finishes with “panem et circenses”. But my argument was too cynical. It failed to offer a way out.
For more than a decade, people in different parts of the world have been working on what is various called “deliberative democracy” or citizen juries which offer inspiring examples of that way out. Two shortish articles offer the best introduction to developments in this field - first this and then then the second part here
Some people would argue that this is just a fleeting fashion and that a more effective path would be to -
increase local government power – ie giving a greater voice to the local public through their local representatives having a stronger legal and strategic role?
Or does it require a more open and participative process – with deliberative democracy and citizen juries?
Or does it perhaps mean a greater say by the workforce in the everyday management of public services?
Or a combination of all the above?
Hilary Wainwright is amongst the very few who have taken such questions seriously – with her “Public Service Reform – but not as know it” (2009) although the Dutch, with the Buurtzog model, are now exploring the question. Cooperatives, social enterprise and worker-owned companies may employ only a tiny percentage of the global workforce but offer huge advantages to the increasing number of people looking for work which gives meaning to their lives.
Background Reading on the growing recognition of the need for greater citizen input
https://howtosavetheworld.ca/2023/05/13/ready-for-civilizations-collapse/
Response from Sottish Government to 2021 Report on Citizen Assemblies March 2023 – 14 page response hot off the press
Metasurvey of deliberative democracy (American Pol Science Review 2023) a typical dry and academic article which may be of use to academics
Citizen Assemblies in Scotland – report to Scottish Government (2021) The Scottish Government asked 100 Scots to act as a citizen jury on the future of their country. This 250 page report was the result – telling you everything you need to know about the operation of such a jury – lovely vignettes of both the participants and their advisers
Catching the Deliberative Wave (OECD 2020) Executive summary of recent important book Innovate Citizen Participation and new democratic institutions - catching the Deliberative Wave which tries to help the global elite make sense of the latest challenge to their rule
Macron’s Grand Debat; useful 2019 article about the French approach
Citizen jury experience (2016) german; rather academic
Creating Freedom – the lottery of birth, the illusion of consent, the fight for freedom Raoul Martinez (2016) Fascinating book which starts from the proposition that the current failure of our social systems must lead us to question our foundational beliefs
Waves of Democracy – social movement and political change; John Markoff (2015 2nd edition) looks a pretty definitive approach to recent developments – by a Pittsburgh political sociologist with a strong background in history and in other cultures – and a very good writing style
Can Democracy be Saved? - participation, deliberation and social movements; Donatella Della Porta (2013)Too much of the discussion on democracy is conducted by anglo-saxon political scientists. Here an Italian sociologist makes the connection to the social movement literature, offering 4 models of democracy. The writing style is a bit too academic for me
Democracy at Work – a cure for capitalism Richard Wolff (2012) a famous economist makes the case for increasing the power of workers
Employee Ownership Dave Erdal (2012) short article by someone who transferred ownership of his company to his workers
Power in movement – social movement and contentious politics; Sydney Tarrow (2011 edition – first in 1994) one of the key writers about social movements, he manages to cover a huge literature in a very clear manner.
Democratic innovations – designing institutions for citizen participation Graham Smith (2009) who was the research direcctor of the famous UK Power inquiry of 2004.
Finally, for those who want to know more about the operation of citizen juries, here’s the site of The Deliberative Democracy Journal whose articles are free (eg this one about different German approaches) and The Citizen Convention for UK democracy
