Book review: How Cities Can Transform Democracy
Why Read This
What Makes This Article Worth Your Time
Summary
What This Article Is About
Matthew Thompson reviews Ross Beveridge and Philippe Koch’s How Cities Can Transform Democracy, which reconceptualizes democracy beyond state-centric liberal proceduralism by reconnecting it to radical roots in demos and polis—the city and its urban citizenry. The book positions democracy as active verb rather than institutional noun, grounding it in everyday urban practices like housing cooperatives, municipal assemblies, and commoning activities that generate “new urban publics” through neighbors and strangers coalescing around shared material interests. Beveridge and Koch embrace post-foundational associative democracy over dissociative insurgency, favoring Arendtian solidarity-building over Rancièrian spectacular protest, seeking democracy in routine urban rhythms rather than extraordinary revolutionary events.
Thompson critically examines whether this emphasis on democracy as process over institutional form risks occluding organizational questions essential for challenging liberal-bourgeois democracy—particularly the party-form and class composition issues largely absent from analysis. He questions the book’s romantic urban imaginary channeling Lefebvre’s “politics of proximity,” asking whether urban democracy’s distinctiveness beyond general provisioning systems constitutes methodological cityism, and whether it addresses planetary urbanisation’s hinterland question—extractive landscapes, logistical corridors, and class-polarized spaces beyond progressive global city cores where reactionary politics emerges. Despite these limitations, Thompson credits the book for provocatively pushing critical urban studies toward generative reimagining of urbanisation-democracy connections, offering tantalizing glimpses of “urban state” possibilities through case studies of Preston, Cooperation Jackson, Barcelona en Comú, and Naples illustrating varying “interstitial distances” between democracy and state bureaucratic control.
Key Points
Main Takeaways
Democracy as Urban Verb
Beveridge and Koch reconceptualize democracy as lived process and active practice grounded in everyday urban rhythms—housing cooperatives, municipal assemblies, commoning—rather than achieved institutional state confined to electoral proceduralism.
Associative Over Dissociative Politics
Rejecting Rancièrian extraordinary insurgency and Laclau-Mouffe agonism, the book champions Arendtian solidarity-building through “commoning of solidarities” generating new urban publics around shared material interests rather than spectacular protest events.
Paradoxical Democracy-State Nexus
Democracy must exist within yet apart from state bureaucratic control—”interstitial distance” creating paradoxical “embrace of apartness and acceptance of its ultimate impossibility,” illustrated through Preston, Jackson, Barcelona, Naples case studies.
Absent Class Composition Analysis
Thompson critiques lack of engagement with class conflict and composition—how urban multitude bridges proletariat, lumpen proletariat, old/new petty bourgeoisie, precariat, projectariat, professional-managerial class through shared urban materiality.
Organizational Form Occluded
Emphasis on democracy-as-process over institutional form leaves undefined whether urban state comprises parties/representatives, assemblies/delegates, cooperatives/members, councils/unions—the essential party-form question for challenging liberal-bourgeois democracy.
Planetary Urbanisation’s Hinterland Question
Thompson questions methodological cityism haunted by extractive operational landscapes, logistical corridors, and class-polarized hinterlands where reactionary petty bourgeois politics emerges—spaces beyond progressive coastal hub municipalism.
Master Reading Comprehension
Practice with 365 curated articles and 2,400+ questions across 9 RC types.
Article Analysis
Breaking Down the Elements
Main Idea
Searching City’s Essence in Democracy
Thompson’s central project examines Beveridge and Koch’s radical reconceptualization positioning democracy not merely in cities but as inherently urban phenomenon—”search for the essence of the city in democracy” transcending state-centric liberal proceduralism and revolutionary insurgency alike by grounding democracy in everyday material practices of urban commoning. The review’s overarching question asks what distinctive urban quality generates democratic possibilities beyond general provisioning systems applicable to any settlement, probing whether the book’s emphasis on associative solidarity-building over institutional form and class analysis adequately addresses organizational questions essential for challenging bourgeois democracy, particularly given planetary urbanisation’s fragmenting city into operational hinterlands where reactionary rather than progressive politics increasingly materializes.
Purpose
Critical Engagement Through Generative Questions
Thompson writes to simultaneously credit Beveridge and Koch’s provocative contribution to critical urban studies while identifying theoretical and empirical gaps requiring further development, particularly around class composition, organizational form, and planetary urbanisation’s spatial contradictions. His purpose extends beyond mere summary to generative critique raising questions the book provokes but doesn’t fully answer—whether urban democracy’s distinctiveness constitutes methodological cityism, how class coalitions organize across vertical/horizontal tensions, what institutional forms constitute the “urban state,” and how democratic publics emerge in extractive hinterlands rather than progressive cores. The review functions as scholarly conversation advancing debates over radical democracy’s spatial dimensions while positioning the book within broader municipalism literature, noting significant omissions like Bookchin’s assemblies and Paris Commune’s revolutionary urbanism.
Structure
Exposition to Progressive Critical Questioning
Conceptual Framing → Book Summary → Appreciative Reading → Critical Interrogation → Comparative Analysis → Hinterland Challenge. Opens by situating democracy as “post-political empty signifier” evolving from Westphalian nation-state liberal proceduralism through recent populist backlashes before introducing Beveridge-Koch’s intervention reconnecting democracy to demos/polis. Expository middle sections appreciate their verb/noun dialectic, associative over dissociative politics, and post-foundational theoretical positioning, noting resonances with Turner’s housing-as-verb and Blomley’s property unsettling. Transitions to critical questioning around institutional form occluded by process emphasis, class composition absence despite urban multitude invocation, and party-form organizational questions. Comparative analysis follows juxtaposing their approach with Schafran et al.’s spatial contract and foundational economy provisioning systems, asking whether city adds conceptually beyond settlement/system. Concludes with hinterland challenge invoking Brenner-Katsikis operational landscapes and Neel’s class-polarized near/far hinterlands revealing urban democracy’s potential methodological cityism.
Tone
Scholarly Generous Yet Rigorously Interrogative
Thompson adopts collegial academic tone balancing generous appreciation (“admirably short and punchy,” “intellectually curious and politically provocative,” “welcome departure”) with rigorous theoretical interrogation demanding precision around central concepts. His language engages deeply with post-foundational political theory vocabulary—associative/dissociative strands, interstitial distance, non-sovereign publics, commoning solidarities—while maintaining critical distance questioning whether conceptual moves adequately address material questions of class, organization, and planetary spatial contradictions. Rhetorical questions structure critique without hostility: “What exactly an urban form of democracy amounts to is one of the abiding questions,” “Does this run the risk of occluding institutional form?” Personal scholarly positioning emerges through references to his Liverpool cooperative research finding verb/noun dialectic “illuminating,” establishing authority while maintaining humility. The conclusion’s “intriguing questions provoked” and “generative and imaginative leap” frames critique as productive scholarly conversation rather than dismissive rejection.
Key Terms
Vocabulary from the Article
Click each card to reveal the definition
Build your vocabulary systematically
Each article in our course includes 8-12 vocabulary words with contextual usage.
Tough Words
Challenging Vocabulary
Tap each card to flip and see the definition
Relating to political thought acknowledging absence of ultimate foundation for political order yet maintaining possibility of democratic political action; associated with thinkers like Laclau, Mouffe, Rancière, Arendt.
“How Cities Can Transform Democracy engages with the ‘post-foundational’ thought of radical democracy…”
Relating to conflict or struggle; in political theory, describing approach emphasizing productive antagonism and adversarial pluralism as essential to democratic politics rather than seeking consensus.
“…the agonistic politics of Laclau and Mouffe and the antagonistic politics of Rancière…”
The active practice of collectively managing and provisioning shared resources outside market or state logics; creating and sustaining commons through cooperative social relations.
“…involves a ‘commoning of solidarities’, where the resources of urban collective life feed into the making of alliances…”
In Sheldon Wolin’s theory, describing democracy as fleeting, elusive practice constantly escaping institutional capture; democracy that must continually be activated and claimed rather than permanently constituted.
“Mobilising Sheldon Wolin’s theory of ‘fugitive democracy’…”
In Marxist theory, the underclass outside wage labor—unemployed, homeless, criminals, sex workers—considered unreliable for revolutionary organizing due to lack of class consciousness.
“…the proletariat and the lumpen proletariat, the old and the ‘new petty bourgeoisie’…”
Of inferior rank or status; in postcolonial theory, describing groups excluded from hegemonic power structures, particularly those marginalized by colonialism, class, gender, race.
“…increasingly polarised between privileged global cities and their subaltern hinterlands…”
Reading Comprehension
Test Your Understanding
5 questions covering different RC question types
1According to Thompson’s review, Beveridge and Koch situate themselves in the dissociative strand of post-foundational radical democracy, which emphasizes that democracy can only be realized through acts confronting the dominant political order.
2What does Thompson identify as the primary theoretical gap in Beveridge and Koch’s emphasis on democracy-as-verb over democracy-as-noun?
3Which sentence best captures Thompson’s critique regarding the potential “methodological cityism” problem in Beveridge and Koch’s framework?
4Based on Thompson’s discussion of the democracy-state relationship in Beveridge and Koch’s framework, determine whether each statement is true or false.
Beveridge and Koch argue democracy must simultaneously exist within the state yet maintain “interstitial distance” from bureaucratic control—a paradoxical “embrace of apartness and acceptance of its ultimate impossibility.”
The book advocates completely abandoning state institutions in favor of purely autonomous urban democratic publics operating entirely outside state frameworks through horizontal self-organization.
The four municipalist case studies—Preston model, Cooperation Jackson, Barcelona en Comú, and Naples—illustrate varying “interstitial distances” to the state and their implications for urban democracy.
Select True or False for all three statements, then click “Check Answers”
5Based on Thompson’s discussion of the “hinterland question” and references to Neel’s study of class-polarized spaces, what can be inferred about his concern regarding urban democracy’s spatial limitations?
FAQ
Frequently Asked Questions
This formulation captures Beveridge-Koch’s theoretical ambition transcending empirical cataloging of urban democratic practices (housing cooperatives, municipal assemblies) toward identifying something distinctively urban generating democratic possibilities. They argue democracy isn’t merely located in cities but emerges from urban qualities—neighbors and strangers coalescing around shared material interests through “politics of proximity,” embodied encounters with built environments, commoning solidarities. The city functions as “category of practice” and “political horizon” animating democratic imagination rather than topographical container for practices that could occur anywhere. Thompson questions whether this romanticism rooted in Lefebvrian “intensification and broadening of life” adequately distinguishes urban democracy from general provisioning system governance, potentially constituting methodological cityism privileging cities analytically over other settlement forms.
The verb/noun dialectic—democracy as lived process versus achieved institutional state—reflects tensions between horizontalist movements prioritizing participatory practice and verticalist formations requiring organizational structure. Thompson appreciates their Turner-inspired reconceptualization positioning democracy as active doing, emergent social relation, and continuous (re)production rather than static possession, yet worries their emphasis on process over form risks occluding essential questions about organization, particularly the party-form necessary for challenging liberal-bourgeois democracy. He invokes Peter D. Thomas’s Gramscian reading positioning party as “dynamic process of political composition rather than mere apparatus of command,” suggesting democracy requires “neither vertical nor horizontal” synthesis integrating participatory practice with strategic organizational capacity. The critique suggests verb-focused approaches risk political impotence without addressing institutional consolidation enabling sustained hegemonic challenge.
Thompson identifies Beveridge-Koch’s invocation of “urban multitude” as Hardt-Negri-esque historical subject emerging organically through city or cognitive capitalism connections without adequate analysis of class composition—how proletariat, lumpen proletariat, old/new petty bourgeoisie, precariat, projectariat, professional-managerial class bridge divergent material interests. His concern echoes debates over whether urban proximity automatically generates progressive coalitions or whether class polarization (visible in Neel’s hinterland analysis showing petty bourgeois reactionary politics in extractive zones versus coastal creative class municipalism) fractures urban multitude. The absence suggests urban democracy frameworks risk romantically assuming spatial proximity overcomes class antagonisms, potentially obscuring how gentrification, housing stratification, and uneven development create intra-urban class conflicts requiring explicit political composition rather than spontaneous emergence.
Readlite provides curated articles with comprehensive analysis including summaries, key points, vocabulary building, and practice questions across 9 different RC question types. Our Ultimate Reading Course offers 365 articles with 2,400+ questions to systematically improve your reading comprehension skills.
This article is rated Advanced because it demands sophisticated engagement with post-foundational political theory requiring familiarity with Rancière’s antagonistic politics, Laclau-Mouffe agonism, Arendtian solidarity-building, Gramscian party-form debates, Hardt-Negri’s multitude concept, and municipalism literature. Readers must track Thompson’s multi-layered argument structure moving from exposition through appreciative reading to critical interrogation across class composition, institutional form, methodological cityism, and planetary urbanisation’s hinterland question. The review assumes background in critical urban studies debates over Right to the City, commoning, prefigurative politics, and spatial political economy. Vocabulary includes discipline-specific terminology—dissociative/associative strands, interstitial distance, fugitive democracy, lumpen proletariat, subaltern hinterlands—requiring contextual understanding. The piece rewards readers comfortable navigating academic book review genre conventions balancing summary, theoretical positioning, and constructive critique.
The hinterland question asks how urban democracy functions beyond progressive coastal hubs in planetary urbanisation’s extractive operational landscapes—mines, farms, warehouses, ports, logistical corridors feeding urban cores. Thompson invokes Neel’s class analysis showing stark polarization: glittering cities host creative class municipalism while rural/logistical hinterlands incubate reactionary petty bourgeois neo-fascist politics. This challenges whether urban democracy’s romantic proximity politics adequately addresses spaces where reactionary rather than progressive formations emerge, questioning if frameworks privileging “being together of strangers” in dense cores can organize democratic publics stretched along pipelines, supply chains, frontier extraction zones. The critique suggests urban democracy may constitute methodological cityism ignoring capitalism’s spatial fix requiring subaltern hinterland exploitation enabling privileged core’s progressive politics—a blind spot potentially limiting transformative scope.
The Ultimate Reading Course covers 9 RC question types: Multiple Choice, True/False, Multi-Statement T/F, Text Highlight, Fill in the Blanks, Matching, Sequencing, Error Spotting, and Short Answer. This comprehensive coverage prepares you for any reading comprehension format you might encounter.
