Back in the early 1990s Chantal Mouffe and others thought citizenship was the only democratic alternative the left had to offer to (then) triumphant 'Western liberal' democracy. So far as I can tell that is still the case where left intellectuals are concerned. But in 2026 it is clear there is a dark alternative - including within the West - in the forms of atavistic primitivism; be they populist nationalism, jihadism, authoritarianism, or whatever else.
Yet at the same time current affairs are revealing that at least intermittent activity on the part of ordinary citizens is unavoidable within the Western frame as we see it. 'Liberal' democracy still has to be democratic, whether what is sometimes called liberalism presents its economic or its cultural face to the world.
First, when faced by external threat, conscription, community or national service, civil defence, and so on, will be accepted by most people, as in Scandanavia, as necessary. But such practices are sometimes actually welcomed as providing valuable experience to younger people and helping them to relate to people from diverse backgrounds. As in ancient Greece, or Renaissance Italian city-states, these (along with jury service) are very much the sort of practices active citizens would be expected to engage in.
Second, the recent court settlement in California on Meta algorithms illustrates that ordinary people need not be routinely involved in public life to make an impact across the political divide. That can be against precisely the powerful corporations left-wing critics claim make democracy ineffectual. Court settlements making such corporations pay out large sums of money may be actually more effective than state legislation. Such is the latest instance of the old saying that there is more than one way to skin a cat.
Perhaps surprisingly, the implications for the West are far from 'conservative'. All the further if the common people are to be bestirred to resist the challenge from atavistic primitivisms.