This is yet another reminder that communities have to form around some larger purpose than mere economic exchange.
His references to the British think tank Demos is particularly interesting.
The author attempts to fuse an emphasis on personal sovereignty, or what he sometimes calls 'proper selfishness,' and the need for community especially within business enterprises. Recognizing that it is increasingly likely that he or she will be left to fend for themselves in the harsh environment of free markets, the individual should not seek employment, per se, but should develop 'employability.' Of course, backpedaling, the author recognizes that the educational system as well as other institutions does little to develop and sustain a society of entrepreneurs. The 'one-shot' chance at an education of forgettable facts is largely useless to those who desire/must operate service businesses. But this harsh reality is not all bad; the author insists that there is a widespread 'hunger' for personal growth that will be a part of developing employability. Work that has a greater purpose will increasingly be sought. Does walking the dogs or trimming the grass of elites qualify?
This line of thinking also has ramifications within corporations. These newly 'inner-directed' employees will reject being regarded as 'human resources' or managed as some kind of business cost. They will settle for nothing less than being viewed as citizens of their companies with 'rights of residence, justice, free speech, a share of the wealth ', and a say in the governance of their [companies].' The author correctly acknowledges that the democratic reorganization of companies seems like a 'trade union manifesto,' which does not comport well with his expressed anti-union convictions. Other than through the insistence of these newly redirected employees, the author is unclear as to how the major redistribution of power that will be required to establish 'companies of citizens' will occur. Of course, the compelling question is why the author is concerned about businesses as communities. Properly selfish, self-employed, citizens no longer need to work for corporations, right?
Despite the fact that the author generally regards laissez-faire economics as troublesome for the greater society, he seems unwilling to advocate for political processes to exert much control over its excesses. In fact, he suggests that major issues are best decided outside the political process beyond the level of the nation-state by pressures from global markets or by international economic (WTO) and military alliances. Citizens/voters should confine themselves to local issues of roads and schools and police and hospitals. This minimalist view of politics and government is hardly adequate to address the effects of the 'bottom line' thinking of modern capitalism for which the author expresses concern. The revamping of educational systems to include life-long learning with replacement income during schooling and the restructuring of corporations will require greater, not lesser, political intervention.
As a critique of capitalistic society, this book is marginal at best. The author's focus on the drive for money and the workings of market forces doesn't begin to explain the structure of capitalistic societies. Absent are virtually any descriptions of the power structures in society and, most importantly, the domination of contemporary culture and the control of information by media empires. It is clear that the author has little appreciation for the profound role of citizen empowerment whether that is through the political process or such bodies as unions that will be necessary to counter the forces of modern capitalism. The idea that half of society becoming entrepreneurs trying to sell services to each other or to a layer of elites without significantly countering present economic forces will represent a general advancement for society is dubious at best. If anything, it seems a certain path for a First-World country to become a Second- or Third-World country.