Community, Conflict and the State examines vying concepts in relation to community, social well-being, community safety and community cohesion, and analyses ways in which they have shaped social policy in Britain over time. A key theme concerns the utilisation of ‘community’ as both a conservative and a radical concept, adopted by the powerful in seeking to maintain the status quo, and by the disadvantaged to challenge it. The author marshals a substantial and impressive body of literature by way of illustration and to support his central argument – that social well-being, community safety and cohesion are unlikely to be advanced by a social system in which the main objective is economic competitiveness in global markets. A consequence of the prioritisation given by governments over the last 30 years to the needs of the economy has not, he argues, been the enhancement of well-being of the majority, but instead ‘a dramatic transformation in social relations in Britain – characterised by widening social inequalities, increasing community tensions and declining social well-being for many people’ (p. 1).

The book cogently details ways in which recent and current neo-liberal policy agendas have redefined certain social issues. Examples include the replacement of welfare approaches to social problems by criminal justice solutions for example, the corollary of which has been a rise in the public's fear of crime. At the same time, Communitarian inspired policy development has resulted in growth of the appeal of ‘community’ as a site for intervention: urban regeneration programmes promote consultation and seek to encourage participation, while the ‘empowerment’ of local people is expected to be advanced by encouraging involvement in local decision making and services.

Chapter 1, ‘Community, Conflict’ and the State’, places the book's key themes within the historical context of a deeply divided British society and enduring community conflict. It demonstrates, for example, that dominant discourses on community have, over time, persistently addressed the need to protect the interests and safety of the privileged by managing risks posed by ‘dangerous communities’ on the one hand, and, on the other, reflected the desire of the oppressed to make demands through engaging in community action. Chapter 2, ‘Concepts of “Community” and “Conflict”’, unpacks different understandings of these terms and focuses on two competing notions: the first sees community as the solution to social conflict and the second as a potential site for its mobilisation. In the first, conflict is interpreted negatively, in the second, as potentially positive and desirable. Chapter 3, ‘New Labour, Community Safety, Cohesion and Well-being’, considers certain policies pursued since 1997, particularly in relation to community safety, urban regeneration and community cohesion. It argues that New Labour's approach is consistent with that of previous governments whose policies have pathologised the urban poor and sought to modify their behaviour. Locating New Labour's discourse on community and safety in Communitarian ideology, Cooper argues that New Labour policies − across a range of arenas − will not generate community cohesion and well-being for the many because they are based on flawed communitarian notions of ‘community’ as harmonious social relations that ‘ignore power differentials and structured inequalities in society, and focus instead on the “flawed cultures” of “failed communities”‘ (p. 171). Their notion of community is problematic, he maintains, as communities invariably consist of diverse interest groups and have never been characterised by shared values. Chapter four, ‘Rethinking Community Safety, Cohesion and Well-being’, turns away from policy responses involving the relatively minor misdemeanours of the least advantaged to focus instead on the destructive effects of ‘anti-social’ policies and practices of government and private corporations. It illustrates how economic change and social policy choices like welfare cut-backs, have, since the 1980s, contributed to the emergence of a less supportive society and, as a consequence, increasing exposure to risk.

Drawing on critical theories of community and conflict, the concluding chapter proposes a more progressive vision of community well-being, which looks to the emancipatory potential of community as a site upon which to mobilise solidarity and resistance, and to enhance the capacity of people to engage in collective action for social change. The focus on radical community development and its potential for empowerment is, I think, the book's strongest feature. Here the author uses the approach to propose ways for researching and working with communities.

This is a thought-provoking book; the arguments presented are cogent and convincing. As a critique from the left, its treatment and analysis of New Labour is exacting and castigatory. Yet the reader is left with the impression that no area of British life has shown improvement since 1997; some acknowledgment of modest gains achieved for people on low incomes or living in deprived areas might have further strengthened the exposition on persistent underlying structural inequalities rather than weaken it. Similarly, by privileging interpretations of ‘community’ which highlight its conflictual elements and rejecting the validity of those which acknowledge resilience of a consensual, mutually supportive dimension of community life (along with its significance for well-being), we are left with the sense that social relations under late capitalism cannot be anything other than Hobbesian. Just as there are dangers in giving undue prominence to a notion of community entailing unity, harmony, and shared values, there are problems in over-emphasising the community-as-conflict model. Either can be obscurant; for many place-based communities, the reality is likely to lie somewhere in between.

These minor caveats aside, I enjoyed reading Community, Conflict and the State, its coverage is gratifyingly wide, and I would happily recommend it to students, researchers and policy makers.