Anthony Barnett (London, OK): Today's Guardian is fascinating for anyone interested in democracy. Start with the good news. A campaign to rid the Kingdom of plastic bags is underway, "a revolution which began in Modbury Devon" is now taking the country by storm. An editorial nervously praises the "direct action": "What is striking is that things often start off with just a handful of people... Their success reflects the appeal of tackling a global problem by action that benefits the immediate neighbourhood... Politicians might rue another missed bus, and most of the rest of us may wish they offered more determined leadership on the environment. But at least civil society, which sometimes seems to be dying a lingering death, still has the capacity to flare into life..."
Leave aside the sob-story of a leader-writer regretting they have not used their influence to better effect. Isn't it the case that the depositers of Northern Rock also represented civil society on the march?
Which brings us to Gordon Brown. He has an important article in the same issue of the paper. It defends the changes he is determined to bring into the way the Labour Party Conference works, ending what he calls "resolutions without solutions". Is this the end of inner party democracy? No, says Gordon, "The party of the future will have to find new ways of building links with the people. We must become more open and democratic".
His starting point, in contrast to the weepy leader-writer, is the energy and influence of civil society and the need for traditional politics to engage with it. He wants his party to look "outward not inward". Brown is right in this sense, if they are not careful political parties will follow the fate of the plastic bag. But if so, won't this weaken not strengthen democracy? And are the reforms he is proposing ones that will really empower party members? Or will they just strengthen the grip of the leadership and the media as Tony Benn claims?
