Benjamin Barber, the director of the Walt Whitman Center for the Culture and Politics of Democracy at Rutgers University, is currently the foremost proponent of “participatory” democracy. Instead of settling for simple representation, he strives to empower every citizen to act as a legislator and achieve what he calls “unmediated self-government.” In pursuit of this ambitious goal, he passionately speaks at academic conferences, emphasizing the civic capabilities of individuals. Often, his speeches resemble those of a politician on the campaign trail rather than those of a professor.
Barber has written extensively advocating for an ideal regime while also addressing opposing viewpoints. In his most famous work, Strong Democracy (1984), he criticized modern philosophers such as Hobbes, Locke, and Mill for defining political liberty negatively, rather than emphasizing civic action. In The Conquest of Politics (1988), Barber denounced contemporary political theorists like John Rawls, Robert Nozick, and Alasdair MacIntyre for their “abstractionism” and disregarding the practical concerns of engaged citizens.
In his book “An Aristocracy of Everyone” (1992), Barber identifies opponents of democratic education from both ends of the political spectrum. On one hand, he criticizes the trendy relativism of the left, and on the other hand, he criticizes the traditional elitism of the right. In his most recent publication, “Jihad vs. McWorld,” which is based on a 1992 article from the Atlantic Monthly, Barber addresses not only intellectual threats to democracy but also socioeconomic threats. The title of his book refers to what Barber sees as the two major global trends in today’s world. These trends are both fragmenting the world into irreconcilable parts and simultaneously creating an unprecedented unity.
Barber’s book primarily focuses on McWorld, which refers to the constantly growing service sector in the global economy. This is particularly evident in what Barber describes as the “infotainment telesector,” which is largely American in essence, even if not always American-owned. Barber summarizes this phenomenon by listing various brand names and popular icons, such as Disney and Paramount, Nike and Reebok, Madonna and MTV, Coke and Pepsi, Homer Simpson and Batman, Kentucky Fried Chicken, and of course, McDonald’s.
Relentlessly promoting its “ideology of fun” at the expense of local institutions and folkways, the relentless promotion of this “virtual economy” of images and lifestyles threatens to create a world monoculture. This is particularly concerning for civic life, as citizens become manipulated by promotion, spin, packaging, and advertising, losing interest in public matters and engaging solely in passive consumption to satisfy their endless desires. In the second part of the book, Barber explores the concept of “Jihad,” expanding its meaning beyond strictly Islamic terms to encompass any efforts by parochial communities to protect themselves from Western cosmopolitan standards. Jihad serves as a metaphor for opposing modernity, encompassing not only religious extremists like Hamas and Hezbollah, but also chauvinistic ideologies found in Russia’s Zhirinovsky, Bosnian Serbs, language rights activists, and separatists in regions such as Quebec, Catalonia, and Occitan France. These extreme forms of opposition to modernity pose a significant threat to democracy.
In the final section of the book, Barber proposes that a democratic future can still be achieved by embracing the concept of civil society. He suggests that community groups and voluntary associations play a crucial role in supporting democratic citizenship and the effective functioning of democratic institutions. Barber emphasizes the importance of strengthening this fragile social infrastructure. However, his proposal for accomplishing this, namely the creation of a “global civil society,” lacks sufficient detail and is somewhat disappointing compared to the rest of the book. Despite occasional use of academic jargon, Barber adopts a language and style that resembles everyday politics, making the book more of a journalistic polemic and a commentary on current events.
Unfortunately, Barber has failed to notice that most editorials last a mere half-dozen paragraphs. His drags on for several hundred pages, sustained by exaggeration (media corporations control “the defining symbolic essentials of civilization”), repetition (he appeals for “full employment” no fewer than ten times), and an almost encyclopedic recitation of facts (we learn entirely too much about such things as world oil and mineral production and the viewing habits of Belgians and Pakistanis). More importantly, Barber is positively evasive in Jihad vs.
McWorld discusses his own concept of democracy, although he uses it as a standard throughout. His description consists of various adjectives and phrases: genuine self-government is “participatory,” “deliberative,” supportive of a “common culture,” and based on the “common will” of “autonomous” citizens. However, these slogans are not harmless, as suggested by his explanation. Continuing in the footsteps of Rousseau, whom he references occasionally to demonstrate the background of his own beliefs, Barber is dedicated to a democratic project that is both collectivist in its goals and significantly illiberal in its implications.
His refusal to recognize the impact of McWorld, or international capitalism, on political liberalization in countries like Chile, South Korea, and Hungary immediately raises suspicions. He disregards the established connection between a thriving private sector, a free civil society, and the demand for democratic elections and the enforcement of legal principles. According to him, this change is too gradual and uncertain to be acknowledged.
Barber refuses to acknowledge the existence of true freedom within democratic capitalism. The statues of Marx and Engels in Marx-Engels-platz in East Berlin face east, seemingly in search of solace from Moscow. However, the surrounding streets are now filled with chain restaurants like T. G. I. Friday’s, international hotels such as the Radisson, and a circle of neon billboards that taunt them with brand names like Panasonic, Coke, and GoldStar.
The presence of new gods does not necessarily mean more freedom. Barber argues that the presence of consumer goods in the former Communist bloc and other places directly challenges the emergence of democracy. These signs of commercialism do not signal increased economic opportunities but instead indicate the arrival of McWorld, which Barber describes as a new and dangerous form of “totalitarianism” without irony. McWorld has the power to shape public attitudes and influence private actions, leaving us with predetermined choices in all aspects of life, whether political or not.
Barber argues that the electoral success of those he disagrees with, particularly in precincts where McWorld is dominant, is evidence of indoctrination. He criticizes Western governments, particularly the U.S. and Britain, for lacking enthusiasm in regulating or controlling for the benefit of the public. In contrast, Barber’s sympathy for Jihad is apparent, even though he does not consider himself antimodern.
The text suggests that Jihad is not resisting modernity as a whole, but rather a specific aspect of it: the materialism, solipsism, and radical individualism that come with a free market. Barber argues that Jihad opposes these values of the Enlightenment, while also acknowledging the West’s “nobler aspirations.” This implies that the East German Communist Party and the gerontocrats in Beijing share the same impulse as Jihad, as they too struggle to preserve their unique cultures against an aggressive global economy.
Ayatollahs and commissars agree with each other in this “holy war.” Additionally, Barber finds certain democratic possibilities in Jihad that McWorld lacks, despite objecting to some of Jihad’s more unpleasant political aspects. With its “toxic exclusivity,” Jihad facilitates a civic life centered around collective thinking and action, where democratic command structures could have a more extensive role in determining “fundamental social values.” Barber excels at using such euphemisms to describe democratic tyranny.
The author of this text, along with other academic advocates of “communitarian identity politics,” believes that there is a seamless connection between individual rights and a public sphere that intends to deeply influence individuals’ values. However, history demonstrates the opposite. It is difficult to determine whether the author’s stance stems from naivete or a careless lack of concern. The author supports their argument by referencing ancient Athens, Puritan Massachusetts, and Jacobin France as examples of democratic models. Nevertheless, we should not forget the unfortunate destinies of Socrates, the accused “witches” in Salem, and countless French aristocrats.
Barber’s focus on a comprehensive concept of democratic politics explains why he does not give much attention to civil society in Jihad vs. McWorld. Civil society, rooted in family, neighborhood, religion, and the benefits of the free market, is only seen by Barber as a temporary stage to cultivate citizens who will eventually advocate for democracy. In his previous and more honest book, Strong Democracy, Barber acknowledged that the narrow attachments found in civil society undermine the broader connections necessary for his ambitious vision.
Barber’s thought is frustrating because he disregards the various satisfactions available in a liberal democracy. He believes there is no middle ground or way of life that can meet our diverse needs. According to him, anyone who consumes a Big Mac is a supporter of McWorld, and anyone who has religious beliefs is an extremist who opposes modernity. Unfortunately, neither of these individuals are considered proper citizens. This excessively emotional and poorly written book lacks the spirit of moderation that has made the American system appealing to the rest of the world during this time of democratic revitalization.
