Theorists from Tocqueville and John Stuart Mill to Durkheim, Simmel, and Kornhauser have long emphasized the importance of civic society and voluntary associations as vital to the lifeblood of democracy. There is nothing particularly novel about claims for the virtues of civic associations and their capacity to perform many functions where states and the market fail. Pluralist theories popular in the 1960s emphasized the role of interest groups in aggregating and articulating public demands, providing multiple alternative channels of political participation linking citizens and the state. Collaboration through a diverse range of informal organizations in the voluntary sector, such as Parent-Teacher Associations, local recycling groups, and village cooperatives, pluralists argue, provide local solutions to community problems, an alternative mechanism of governance, and a training ground for democracy. In the 1980s, social movement theorists revised and updated this approach by stressing the role of more amorphous organizations, exemplified by environmentalists, feminists, and the peace movement. These were seen as avenues of expression for post-materialist social values, especially for the younger generation, as well as organizations facilitating direct community action. Work today continues to build on this foundation. But what is most striking about modern theories of civic society is the claim that typical face-to-face deliberative activities and horizontal collaboration within voluntary associations far removed from the political sphere, such as sports clubs, agricultural cooperatives, and philanthropic groups, promote interpersonal trust, fostering the capacity to work together and creating the bonds of social life that are the basis for civil society and democracy.