0% found this document useful (0 votes)
10 views21 pages

Different Views

The document discusses the concept of civil society and the role of NGOs within it, contrasting liberal and critical perspectives. The liberal view sees civil society as a positive force for democracy and civic responsibility, while the critical view emphasizes conflict and the potential for co-optation by the state. It also highlights the complexities of civil society, including the influence of various interests and the challenges faced by NGOs in maintaining their independence and effectiveness.

Uploaded by

gultekinmiray57
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
10 views21 pages

Different Views

The document discusses the concept of civil society and the role of NGOs within it, contrasting liberal and critical perspectives. The liberal view sees civil society as a positive force for democracy and civic responsibility, while the critical view emphasizes conflict and the potential for co-optation by the state. It also highlights the complexities of civil society, including the influence of various interests and the challenges faced by NGOs in maintaining their independence and effectiveness.

Uploaded by

gultekinmiray57
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 21

Non Governmental

Organizations
Different views on civil society (Liberal vs. Critical)
NGOs and ‘civil society’

• During the last two decades, the concept of ‘civil society’ has
been revivedfrom its eighteenth-century roots in the work of
political scientists and philosophers searching for an
understanding of what happens in the organized ‘associational
realm’ which lies between the family and the state.
• This revival of the idea of civil society has taken place not only
within the development industry: but is now increasingly
invoked as part of wider debates about politics and
democratization, public participation and welfare service
delivery, as well as in connection with campaigning and
advocacy at the international level.
NGOs and ‘civil society’

• There are many factors which have led to this recent


rediscovery. It was also reintroduced into political discourse
by the democratic opposition to communist states in
Eastern Europe. The concept of civil society was also used
in the 1970s by Latin American activists and academics in
the context of resisting military dictatorship. After the end
of the Cold War, the former superpowers reduced their
support to client states – which often had authoritarian
regimes – and this released demands by citizens to
challenge existing power structures.
NGOs and ‘civil society’

• Civil society is usually taken to mean a realm or space in


which there exists a set of organizational actors which are
not part of the household, the state or the market. These
organizations form a wide-ranging group which includes
associations, people’s movements, citizens’ groups,
consumer associations, small producer associations and
cooperatives, women’s organizations, indigenous peoples’
organizations – and of course the groups which we are
calling NGOs.
Definitions

• “a sphere of social interaction between the household and the state which
is manifest in norms of community co-operation (trust, tolerance,
inclusion, joining), structures of voluntary association (citizens coming
together into voluntary associations both local/national, formal/informal)
and networks of public communication (pluralist media, personal access
to communication technology etc.)”
• This view sees civil society as a source of civic responsibility and public
virtue, and as a place where organized citizens – including NGOs – can
make a contribution to the public good. The liberal tradition emphasizes
the socializing effects of association, which helps to build ‘better citizens’.
The concept of civil society to which development agencies have been
drawn is based upon the idea of an interdependent organic relationship
between market economy, state and civil society.
Liberal view on Civil Society

• There are two key ways to understand civil society. The first
perspective derives from Alexis de Tocqueville’s (1805-
1859) sanguine assessment of civil society in the United
States during the 19th century. According to followers of de
Tocqueville, civil society is an ‘autonomous area of liberty
incorporating an organizational culture that builds both
political and economic democracy’.
• A range of non-voting factors that Tocqueville examines, the
most influential has been his emphasis on associations.
Debates about associations were already central to
ideological and constitutional conflicts inside democratic
America by the time Tocqueville wrote.
• In this perspective, civil society is considered a
counterweight to, and essentially separated from, state
power and market forces.
NGOs and ‘civil society’

• In the liberal view, which is the one which has been most
popular with governments and donors, civil society is seen
as an arena of organized citizens which acts as a balance
on state and market, as a place where civic democratic
values can be upheld, and in a normative sense civil
society is considered on the whole in this view to be a
‘good thing’.
• Much of the writing on NGOs has been influential is shaped
by the liberal view.
Civil society and Democracy
Civil society and Democracy

• A strong civil society can also strengthen democracy by


educating citizens to exercise their right to participate in
public life, by encouraging marginalized groups to become
more active in the political arena, and by helping to build
overlapping networks – in the sense of Putnam’s (1993) idea
of cross-cutting ‘social capital’ – which can reduce the
destabilizing effect of single interest religious or ethnic
groups within a culturally diverse context. The idea of social
capital is currently influential in relation to development and
democracy, and NGOs have been seen as organizations
which can contribute to its creation and its maintenance.
NGOs and Democracy

• The liberal view of civil society implies a critique of state


domination of public life, advocates reform rather than revolution,
and would bring about political change through election and
negotiation rather than conflict. Many NGO writers and activists,
have therefore argued that NGOs, both Northern and Southern,
have a key role in supporting the emergence of democratic
organizations and institutions in ‘civil society’.
• NGOs can strengthen democratic processes through working as
‘civil society organizations’. In many parts of the world, political
struggles are drawing NGOs towards a more active policy
influencing role as political space opens up for people’s voices in
public affairs.
Civil society and
Hegemony
• Antonio Gramsci (1891-1937), whose writings focused
on three aspects of civil society, differentiating his
analysis from de Tocqueville’s.
• First, he stressed the fluidity of relations between the
state and civil society – arguing that as civil society
(trade unions, media, religious organisations, etc.) and
political society (police, army, legal system, etc.) often
overlap, one cannot be understood without the other.
Indeed he conceived the state as comprising both civil
and political society.
• Second, Gramsci argued that civil society consists of
elements that resist or reinforce hegemonic ideas about
economic and social life. For Gramsci, civil society is a
jumble of groups whose ability to benefit society is
dependent on context and the nature of dominant
ideas.
• Finally, Gramsci was also concerned with international
forces. Social theorist Bob Jessop’s insightful analysis
shows how Gramsci believed that: ‘national states are
not self-closed “power containers” but should be
studied in terms of their complex interconnections with
states and political forces on other scales’.
Civil society and
Hegemony
• It is very difficult to trace the idea of ‘civil society’ in
Gramsci’s “Prison Notebooks”. Sometimes it is clear
and evident when he is speaking about civil society or
state but in many cases he does not mention the word
‘civil society’ exactly but he adds an element of
thought to the broader idea.
• Antonio Gramsci was not the first person to speak
about hegemony. But, he was the one who broadened
the idea of hegemony. Earlier it was understood how
hegemony was established to gain the political power
but Gramsci was undoubtedly the first person to say
that hegemony is an essential element for a ruling
class of people to maintain its authority and power.
• The idea of hegemony was the central theme of
Antonio Gramsci’s thought. Antonio Gramsci mentions
about state and civil society in parts of the “Prison
Notebooks”. Practically his idea on state, civil society is
scattered everywhere in his theoretical work.
Civil society and
Hegemony

• State according to Gramsci was not only the


apparatus of the government but also the
“private” apparatus of “hegemony” or civil
society.
• Gramsci conceived civil society as the safety
valve of the state. If we see the present world
order we will see that how the states are
extending its area of influence through civil
society organizations. This is what Gramsci
perceived during his time. But, Gramsci
prefers ‘civil society’ more than state
because civil society is characterized by
ideological hegemony, while sate uses force
to establish its own authority.
Civil society and
Democracy (Critical View)

• In the critical view, which is drawn mainly from Gramsci’s


work, rather than harmony there is an emphasis on
negotiation and conflict based on struggles for power,
and on blurred boundaries with the state. Civil society
contains many different competing ideas and interests,
not all of which contribute positively to development.
• The more critical Gramscian view sees civil society as the
location for independent resistance to the state. Rather
than the focus on balance and harmony embodied in the
liberal view, MacDonald’s work shows that civil society is
in fact a zone of conflict, and draws attention to the
constraints of class and gender on people’s actions, to
the tensions between the state and civil society (and
those which exist within civil society itself), and finally
highlights the international political economy dimensions
of the discourse of civil society in developing countries.
Civil Society (Critical View)

• Civil society institutions are simultaneously


located on the outer edges of the system
through which state power is legitimized in
society, but at the same time civil society is
an arena in which various social groups can
organize in order to contest state power.

• In Gramscian terms, civil society can


therefore be seen as the site of struggle
between hegemonic and counter-
hegemonic forces .
Criticism

• Civil society organisations can be co-opted by the state, such as those coined Government
Organised NGOs (GONGOs), which are dependent on government funds. The private sector
can also significantly shape civil society organisations, reflected in the categorisation of
Business Organised NGOs (BONGOs) and Business Interested NGOs (BINGOs).
• One of the criticisms which has been made of this approach is that it is often deployed in a
rather ‘apolitical’ sense. The critical view of civil society recognizes that the conflicts over
power and politics which take place in civil society may be important for formal political
processes and cannot easily be separated from them.
• The capacity of NGOs to play a civil society role is contingent on the specific character and
power of the state, and for developing countries in particular on the international political
environment.
• In many countries, individuals may move between NGOs, the government and opposition
political parties as the vehicles for political change. After the change of government in the
Philippines in 1986 which ended the authoritarian Marcos regime, there were many activists
from the NGO sector who accepted jobs in the new administration because they saw
government as a potentially more effective base for putting ideas into action.
Criticism

• Donor support to civil society strengthening has often been through the funding of
NGOs, though this has led in practice to support for service delivery NGOs rather than
for more militant advocacy NGOs which might challenge the policies of the government
and the donors keen to maintain the ‘new policy agenda’.
• At the same time, when NGOs have become involved in political movements they have
been criticized.
• For example, the participation of NGOs and other civil society actors in recent political
struggles in Bangladesh during the 1990s led to criticisms that NGOs were getting ‘too
involved’ in politics, but their supporters have argued that such involvements are not
only legitimate, but form an essential part of NGOs’ development role.
• When some of the main NGOs joined the opposition political party and other groups to
demand that a caretaker government be installed to preside over national elections in
1996, NGO leaders defended their actions by arguing that civil society organizations
could not avoid involvement in vital political actions which had major implications for all
citizens, and particularly the poor
Criticism

• Another set of critical criticisms of the liberal view of civil society is its
normative character, which assumes that civil society is a ‘good
thing’.
• Much has been made of the fact that civil society can include organized
groups of many kinds and may include religious fundamentalists and
political bigots as well as developmental or progressive organizations.
Najam points out that the racist Ku Klux Klan organization in the United
States is an organization of civil society, while Putzel has argued in a
similar vein about the ‘dark side of social capital’. It is difficult therefore
to conceptualize civil society as being always positive. (Example: Former
Yugoslavia.)
Criticism

• The problems of competing interests and groups is acknowledged by some


proponents of the liberal view. The struggle between different interest
groups can sometimes create a kind of paralysis. Blair points out that it is
possible to have ‘too much of a good thing’ in terms of civil society action in
the US: too much interest group influence over the state over too long a
period may well lead to immobilism and a hardening of the democratic
arteries or ‘gridlock’ rather than to a rich and vibrant democratic polity.
• Alongside the liberal and the critical views of civil society, there is also what
might be termed the ‘relativist’ critique. Anthropologists have viewed the
revival of the Western concept of civil society and its application to widely
different cultures and contexts in different parts of the world with suspicion,
pointing out the dangers of a new post-Cold War ‘universalism’.
Criticism

• Both liberal and critical conceptions of civil society provide different perspectives on the
roles of NGOs in political processes
• In the Philippines, the liberal or de Tocquevillian view shows the ways in which NGOs have
moved into territories previously occupied by political parties which found it difficult to adapt
to the changing realities of human rights, environment, minorities and gender interests.
• But in the critical or Gramscian perspective it is also possible in the Philippines to use civil
society theory to understand how NGOs have ultimately helped to institutionalize contested
political interests.
• critical militant social movements which developed under the Marcos dictatorship have
become diffused in the post-Marcos era, and NGOs have contributed to the reduction of this
anti-state pressure by absorbing activists into more legitimate ‘development’ and human
rights concerns, and by strengthening the state.
• But the contradictions in the liberal view of seeking to strengthen NGOs as a proxy for
strengthening civil society, and the dangers of taking an apolitical view, point to the need for
NGOs and donors to pay more attention to critical ideas about civil society in seeking to
explain and inform development action.
Internal democracy in NGOs

• The debates about NGO roles in ‘strengthening’ civil society are only one
aspect of the ways in which the concepts of NGO and civil society have
become intertwined.
• An important issue for NGO management is the extent to which NGOs as
organizations display characteristics of civil society within their structures
and processes. In other words, the very existence of NGOs with
internal democratic processes is sometimes taken to be an
indicator of civil society, since the values of participation, cooperation,
trust and internal democracy may help to foster wider political processes
by example.
• Leaders within third sector organizations are not only ‘guardians’ of civil
society with civic responsibilities outside their organizations, but are also
‘responsible for expressions of civil society within their organizations’.

You might also like