Practice Theory and Postsocialist Civil Society: Toward a New Analytical Framework

Abstract

When discussing postsocialist civil societies in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE), scholars have predominantly focused on the nonparticipatory and advocacy-oriented activities of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), effectively narrowing the concept of “civil society” to that of the “civic sector.” This actor-focused and normative approach has resulted in a systematic obfuscation of less structured forms of everyday resistance, civic engagement, active citizenship, contentious politics, and social movements, giving only a partial view of civil societies in the region. Through a critical dialogue between state-of-the-art research on postsocialist civil society and the practice turn in international political sociology (IPS), this article postulates an analytical distinction between contentious and compliant practices in order to arrive at a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the ways in which postsocialist civil societies are manifested, enacted, and actualized. On the one hand, the proposed practice turn moves the research agenda away from abstract, universalist, and normative assumptions of what civil society should be in favor of an embedded, contextual, and critical understanding of what it actually is; on the other hand, this shift opens venues for theorizing not only about, but also from the “postsocialist condition” of civil societies in the transnational space of CEE.

Enacting Resistance, Performing Citizenship: Trajectories of Political Subjectification in the Post-Democratic Condition

“…To this end, I use empirical material from three instances of popular unrest in which Montenegrin citizens decided to abandon institutional venues of political participation and exert their political agency – namely, the student uprisings of 2010–2011, the ad hoc mobilisation of urbanites in 2015 and the environmental movement of 2010–2014 – to demonstrate how each exemplified a distinct trajectory of political subjectification. By taking a practice-oriented approach to the study of postsocialist civil society (Baća, 2022; Jacobsson and Korolczuk, 2020), coupled with varied insights from critical theory (Castoriadis, 1991; Isin, 2009; Rancière, 1999), I conceptualise these trajectories as: (1) political becoming , a process through which a traditionally apolitical demographic group (re)politicises its social role; (2) political bonding , a process through which ordinary citizens exercise their civic autonomy by forging new political bonds between hitherto antagonistic collectives; and (3) political embodying , a process through which localised citizen-led struggle is given universal attributes, standing in as a symbolic representation of other marginalised grievances in the polity. 4 Additionally, I draw from the research programme of pragmatic sociology by relying on the accounts of those I interviewed – especially on their reflexive insights in and on the ‘critical moments’ that ‘break the ordinary course of action’ (Boltanski and Thévenot, 1999: 360) – as a fundamental element of theory construction.…”

“…Social movement scholars have generally found postsocialist CEE uninspiring (cf. Baća, 2022; Bieber and Brentin, 2018; Jacobsson and Saxonberg, 2013; Kopecký and Mudde, 2003). The limited research that was initially conducted on the region portrays local civil societies as overtly passive, characterised by low social trust, widespread scepticism towards institutions, chronically weak associational life and mass withdrawal of citizens from the public sphere (Howard, 2003; Mendelson and Glenn, 2002).…”

“…Simply put, externally sponsored civil society building resulted in the professionalisation of associational life and civic engagement, ultimately culminating in a strong civic sector – a surrogate for a weak civil society – that was alienated from its constituency and, as such, detached from the genuine needs of society (Fagan and Sircar, 2018; Jacobsson, 2015; Kopecký and Mudde, 2003). This process of NGO-isation removed incentives for civil society building ‘from below’, which might have advanced the ‘organic’ creation of new democratic (counter-)cultures through contentious practices (Baća, 2022). The resulting socio-political configuration limited meaningful challenges to dominant power relations and, ultimately, solidified the civic sector as an ideological and logistical support for the development of western-style liberal market democracies, a strategic objective that was normalised as an apolitical and ahistorical necessity.…”

“…In recent years, a growing body of scholarship has convincingly challenged the ‘weak postsocialist civil society’ thesis, mapping instead the vibrant life of social movements and variegated terrains of civic engagement beyond the professionalised civic sector (Baća, 2022; Bieber and Brentin, 2018; Fagan and Sircar, 2018; Jacobsson, 2015; Jacobsson and Saxonberg, 2013; Razsa and Kurnik, 2012; Štiks, 2015; Stubbs, 2012). These grassroots initiatives often criticise the liberal consensus of NGOs, both from the progressive left and the reactionary right.…”

Narratives of Volunteering and Social Change in Wartime Ukraine

“…Over the 30 years of Ukraine's independence, civil society has often been a subject of contrasting assessments. On the one hand, the formal metrics of associational life such as official registration, membership, fiscal revenue and policymaking impact in the country have remained comparatively low (Palyvoda and Galota, 2010), leading some scholars to conclude that Ukraine has a weak civil society (Howard, 2003, see review of literature in Baća, 2021). On the other hand, an emerging body of literature points to more informal and decentralized forms of associational life driving the transformations of statesociety relations (e.g.…”