World news and discussion on TalkFuse.
What Happened to Liberal Democracy? by Daron Acemoğlu review – how to fix the system
Daron Acemoğlu, the Nobel-winning economist, argues in his new book that liberal democracy is in crisis because progressive elites have abandoned the working class, prioritising identity politics over economic concerns. The Guardian review situates his argument alongside similar diagnoses from figures such as French sociologist Didier Eribon and Bernie Sanders, though it notes Acemoğlu leans more heavily on culture-war rhetoric than they do, even as he criticises such rhetoric elsewhere.
Acemoğlu proposes a new "working-class liberal democracy" contract focused on raising living standards for the least skilled, through measures such as cutting red tape around trades like hairdressing, promoting community decision-making modelled on Ireland's citizens' assemblies, holding social media firms responsible as publishers for content they promote, and introducing "worker AI" tools to boost productivity, for instance letting nurses make more medical decisions. The review praises Acemoğlu's writing and analysis, particularly his explanation of how the US tax code incentivises automation and job losses, and his account of Nordic prosperity as the product of deliberate 1930s reforms rather than innate cultural traits, while noting he is honest about tensions within liberalism that lack easy answers.
In short
- Acemoğlu's book blames liberal elites for democracy's crisis
- He says progressives abandoned working-class economic concerns for identity politics
- Proposes deregulation, citizen assemblies, AI tools and platform accountability as fixes
Steelman: both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Progressive movements have increasingly prioritised cultural and identity concerns whilst working-class voters faced stagnating wages, job insecurity, and economic decline. This reflects the priorities of educated urban elites rather than ordinary workers struggling for material security. Economic security is foundational to democratic participation; without stable employment and rising living standards, cultural recognition rings hollow. The Nordic model shows democracy flourishes when elites commit to broad-based prosperity through deliberate economic reform, not performative gestures on cultural matters alone.
The case against
Identity politics and economic justice are not opposed; working-class people themselves belong to marginalised groups whose specific needs—wage discrimination, healthcare access, police violence—were historically ignored by class-focused movements. Progressive parties have championed substantive economic programmes but lack power to enact them; this reflects electoral failure and capital's political dominance, not elite preference for culture over economics. Dismissing identity concerns as distraction from 'real' economics ignores how discrimination materially shapes working-class life. Democratic movements must address both distribution and the particular vulnerabilities of marginalised workers.
Explained simply
Liberal democracy combines elections and government accountability with protections for individual rights, such as free speech and equal treatment under the law. It depends on people seeing democratic institutions as fair and responsive, including those who have less wealth or influence.
Daron Acemoğlu is an economist who studies how political and economic institutions shape prosperity. His argument draws on a wider debate about whether centre-left parties have become less connected to working-class voters, and how much weight politics should give to economic concerns and questions of identity.
Proposals for reform often involve trade-offs: rules can protect rights but also make decisions slower, while new technology can raise productivity but change or remove jobs. The debate matters because confidence in democracy may weaken if people feel it does not improve their lives or give them a meaningful say.