Civil society and democracy in the third world: Ambiguities and historical possibilities

Abstract

The terminology of ?civil society? has gained currency in recent discussions of democratic movements around the globe. Although less grandiose in its implications than claims about the ?end of history,? this terminology does suggest a certain universality in human experience. We argue that this claim of universality is warranted, but also problematic. We establish the relevance of our argument in reference to the literatures in African and Indian studies. We note first that the common employments of the concept ignore the theoretical and historical specificity of civil society: civil society is used to label any group or movement opposed to the state, regardless of its intent or character, or used so generically that it is indistinguishable from the term ?society.? Instead, we argue that civil society is a sphere of social life, involving a stabilization of a system of rights, constituting human beings as individuals, both as citizens in relation to the state and as legal persons in the economy and the sphere of private association. Thus, we link the wide resonance of the concept to its embeddedness in the logic of liberal capitalist society and the capitalist global division of labor. This conception allows us to see that, although the emergence of a sphere of civil society involves at least minimal democranization and is supportive of struggles for further democratization, the status of democracy is also made quite problematic by the tensions endemic to liberal capitalism and the processes of uneven development within international capitalism. Our usage also allows us to distinguish more clearly movements dedicated to the construction of civil society from those that may count actually as counter-civil society movements

The Alternative Genealogy of Civil Society and Its Implications for Africa: Notes for Further Research

“…Admittedly however, this 'promiscuous' (Deakin 2001) embrace has had its own untold consequences, one of which is the obvious lack of attention to the historical and cultural particulars which the Ekeh school believes is so fundamental. Blaney and Pasha (1993) arguably had a similar menace in mind when they also lamented the perceived failure of Third World conceptualisations of civil society in general to take into account 'matters of structure and process' -another oblique reflection of the seeming uneasiness with the geo-cultural ancestry of the idea.…”

Exploring Information Ethics for Inclusive Open Development

“…Civil Society Organisations and Bilateral Donors In general, the term 'civil society' is often used in the development literature to refer to the interaction of people outside other widely recognised institutions such as the government, the marketplace or the family (Alcock and Kendall, 2011;Anheier and Kendall, 2000;Berman, 1997;Blaney and Pasha, 1993;Chandhoke, 2007). Van Rooy (1998) explores the concept and its intellectual traditions in greater depth demonstrating how civil society has been conceptualised in very diverse and often divergent approaches ranging from civil society as a moral goal, a collective noun, a space for action, a historical moment, to an antidote to the state.…”

A State-in-Society Approach to the Nonprofit Sector: Welfare Services in Japan

“…In order to the extent that scholars examine the nonprofit sector in Latin America, Africa, and Asia, their efforts are usually empirically based and largely descriptive rather than theoretical (e.g., the extraordinary and very helpful efforts of the Comparative Nonprofit Sector Project 2 ). Often the scholarship analyzes the nonprofit sectors of ''non-Western'' countries are highly critical of unclear boundaries between state authority and the nonprofit sector (Amemiya 1998;Blaney and Pasha 1993;Chazan 1997;Goodman et al 1998;Norton 1995;Ogawa 2009;Whiting 1991;Wiktorowicz 2000).…”