Writing from New York in 1831, Alexis de Tocqueville described “a society formed of all the nations of the world”—peoples of different languages, beliefs, and opinions forming a society without roots, memory, common ideas, or, indeed, a national character. What held such a polity together? “Interest. That is the secret” (Alexis de Tocqueville, “To Ernest de Chabrol 9 June 1831” in Roger Boesche, Alexis de Tocqueville: Selected Letters on Politics and Society, 1985. p. 38). Such observations and their author's subsequent hypotheses linking self-interest to the Americans' “science of association” figure centrally in recent studies of “social capital” and “strong democracy.” Cynthia Estlund contributes to the literature on communal ties, civic life, and self-government by considering the broad political effects of relationships formed in the not-so-voluntary arena of the American workplace. “Interest” that can initially amount to little more than a shared requirement to “get the job done,” the “working together” thesis maintains, may develop into shared understandings when activities undertaken in common cultivate and enlarge participants' common ground.

In support of this thesis, Estlund presents a wide-ranging review of empirical studies of workplace regulation and workplace bonds in Part I. Literature from political science, law, sociology, and social psychology is marshaled to show how work experiences may promote cooperation, sociability, and solidarity, enabling individuals to bridge persistent social divisions—including barriers impeding gender equity and racial integration. The two concise theoretical chapters of Part II trace an American public philosophy linking work, association, and self-governance from the founding through the New Deal. In a swift review, the author highlights developments from the market ideal (Charles-Louis de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu, Adam Smith, the “founders,” and Tocqueville) through the social theories of alienation and hope-for solidarity following from the realities of industrialization (Tocqueville, Karl Marx, and Émile Durkheim), which culminate in a reprise of localism and face-to-face deliberation (John Dewey). Although detail is sacrificed in traversing this terrain, the general trajectory rings true. Estlund concludes that the resulting early-twentieth-century proponents of “civil society” (and many advocates of the current ideal) too hastily rejected the workplace as a primary site of participation, deliberation, and collective choice. In Part III, she extends the argument, using the rubric of constitutional analysis to consider how policy and law enable the workplace to integrate individuals and society. Principles of equal protection and due process, as well as rights of expression and assembly, find analogues in workplace governance and regulation in this creative analysis of the workplace “constitution,” principles of reform, and proposal for “amendment.” These chapters heighten the contrast between associational types, underscoring the importance of an arena that convenes “strangers from diverse backgrounds and inducing them to work together toward shared objectives under the aegis of the socially imposed equality principle” (p. 129).

The “working together” thesis, thus, addresses several puzzles in the social capital discourse (and democratic theory, more broadly), including a central Tocquevillian concern: how, in a plural society motivated primarily by interest, to draw into association those individuals who apparently lacked resources and political or social standing that would make them of interest in the ongoing celebration of social exchange. It was not only the possible thinning of America's dense social networks that concerned Tocqueville but also the limits of the democratic “virtue,” self-interest well understood, itself. Where ideas held in common seemed entirely lacking—as in the case of his famously pessimistic forecast of American race relations—there could be no common action, experience, or interest. Estlund argues that those who look to voluntary associations as the sole source of social capital will confront the same challenge in a plural society.

A democracy devoted to liberty will tolerate self-segregation in intimate and expressive associations, Estlund observes. Although exclusive associations can contribute to their members' political efficacy and social trust, as well as to the broader fund of social capital, they may do little to promote necessary communication, empathy, and sense of shared enterprise across social divisions. Workplaces not only produce skills and capacities associated with cooperative problem solving but also offer forums for exchanging diverse ideas and experiences (pp. 102, 123, 129). To the several conditions anticipated by advocates of “democratic deliberation”—freedom from coercion and restraint of speech and equality—the author adds considerations of diversity and interdependence among participants. No social space meets the ideal completely, she reminds. Workplaces may surpass other sites of public deliberation to the extent that they become “place(s) for informal exchange of experiences and opinions and knowledge among people who are both connected with each other, so that they are inclined to listen, and different from each other, so that they are exposed to diverse ideas and experiences” (p. 123; emphases in the original). The compelled association of workers may, moreover, advance deliberation and bear the fruits of increased social capital across social divisions. Where “spatial segregation”—geographic divisions separating racial or ethnic groups—prevail, workplaces may offer the only site of interaction where common effort and experience have the potential to bring forth common interests and ideas.

What enables workplaces to accomplish—perhaps uniquely—the task of fostering deeper ties among people who “find it necessary to get along and get things done with others with whom they would not otherwise choose to associate” (pp. 103–4), particularly as equals? What evidence shows that work, indeed, performs such a function? Estlund acknowledges that hypothesized development of workplace association and the “social spillover” from workplace ties may often fall short of their potential. Causal linkage is equally difficult to establish. Empirical evidence indicating a narrowing of social distances between blacks and whites (e.g., the increased report of interracial friendships), for example, seems at most to have a phenomenological association with the increased racial integration of workplaces. Readers unfamiliar with the cited studies may be frustrated by their inability to evaluate the methods and findings on which Estlund bases some conjectures. The personal narratives meant to illustrate some of the book's central insight may seem too condensed, the culling of principles from them too cursory, to alleviate doubt. But she is aware of the compromises necessary to offer a cogent review of several vast literatures to an audience of nonspecialists, including those who, as workers and supervisors, may look to their own workplaces for evidence and principle. If the evidence presented leaves the reader wishing for more, Estlund, nevertheless, offers a wealth of hypotheses presented in a carefully explicated logic. Throughout Working Together, her statements of the propositions affirmed by the available evidence remain modest, while her conscientious analysis of relevant democratic theory and practice underscores the importance of further empirical inquiry.