When looking at a ‘black and white picture’ one rarely realizes, without closer
inspection, that hardly any pure black or white can be found on the emulsion. Rather
varied degrees of grey give the picture its contours on a two-dimensional medium. The conventional term is as Aristotle’s manifested in the law of contradiction,
widersprüchlich. The idea of a ‘global civil society’ (GCS) does not differ from the
observable contradiction between concept and fact of B/W photography. The widely
accepted conceptualisation of GCS as the following argument will show, might be useful as an analytical tool; it does however obscure implicit contradictions of the idea itself. Its terminology, it is argued, can be a reductio ad absurdum if not cautiously used and reflected upon in any given context.
As a neologism, Keane observers, GCS is ‘becoming fashionable’ continuing to justify its conceptual usage ‘as an ideal type, for heuristic purposes’. Whilst dismissing its western origins ‘and the possibility that it imposes alien values’ as irrelevant consideration. Keane not alone in his reduction and in his benign outlook of the ideal type, treads on a swampy path when he goes on to see ‘invisible governance’ as an example of civil society outside its western original in the Batswanan kgotla system of chieftain domination. Without aiming to dismiss the recent achievements of actors in GCS, the aforementioned example of the kgotla highlights how actors of civil societies function ‘within inherited structures of power that they may modify or alter but seldom transform’.5 Thus as this paper will illustrate the fallacy of ‘contemporary thinking’, which as Chandhokes shows ‘gives us a picture of a global civil society that seems to be supremely uncontaminated by either the state or that of markets’.6 In other words the grey notion of GCS cannot be conceptualized without the black of the market and the white of the state [or vice versa].[...]
Table of Contents
1. Third force in which direction? or, the implicit contractions of an idea
Objectives & Themes
The paper aims to critically examine the concept of "Global Civil Society" (GCS) by highlighting the inherent contradictions between its theoretical promise and its practical manifestation within global power structures, ultimately questioning its normative assumption as an inherently "good" force.
- Historical evolution of the civil society concept
- The entanglement of GCS with state and market power structures
- Critical analysis of the "ideal type" and western-centric biases
- The normative contradictions of GCS actors and their transformatory potential
- Discourse on the "third force" and its practical limitations
Excerpt from the Book
Third force in which direction? or, the implicit contractions of an idea
When looking at a ‘black and white picture’ one rarely realizes, without closer inspection, that hardly any pure black or white can be found on the emulsion. Rather varied degrees of grey give the picture its contours on a two-dimensional medium. The conventional term is as Aristotle’s manifested in the law of contradiction, widersprüchlich. The idea of a ‘global civil society’ (GCS) does not differ from the observable contradiction between concept and fact of B/W photography. The widely accepted conceptualisation of GCS as the following argument will show, might be useful as an analytical tool; it does however obscure implicit contradictions of the idea itself. Its terminology, it is argued, can be a reductio ad absurdum if not cautiously used and reflected upon in any given context.
As a neologism, Keane observers, GCS is ‘becoming fashionable’ continuing to justify its conceptual usage ‘as an ideal type, for heuristic purposes’. Whilst dismissing its western origins ‘and the possibility that it imposes alien values’ as irrelevant consideration. Keane not alone in his reduction and in his benign outlook of the ideal type, treads on a swampy path when he goes on to see ‘invisible governance’ as an example of civil society outside its western original in the Batswanan kgotla system of chieftain domination. Without aiming to dismiss the recent achievements of actors in GCS, the aforementioned example of the kgotla highlights how actors of civil societies function ‘within inherited structures of power that they may modify or alter but seldom transform’. Thus as this paper will illustrate the fallacy of ‘contemporary thinking’, which as Chandhokes shows ‘gives us a picture of a global civil society that seems to be supremely uncontaminated by either
Summary of Chapters
1. Third force in which direction? or, the implicit contractions of an idea: The chapter introduces the conceptual paradoxes of Global Civil Society, challenging its definition as a purely autonomous entity by framing it as a contested space embedded in existing power relations.
Keywords
Global Civil Society, NGOs, Power Structures, State, Market, Contradictions, Governance, Ideal Type, Capitalism, Civil Society, Hegemony, Liberalism, Political Economy, Normative, Social Justice
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research paper?
The paper examines the concept of Global Civil Society (GCS) to determine if it acts as a genuine "third force" or if it is paradoxically constrained by the very state and market structures it aims to influence.
What are the primary thematic fields covered?
The central themes include the historical development of civil society, its entanglement with western liberalism, the role of NGOs in global governance, and the socio-political power dynamics of contemporary global capitalism.
What is the central research question?
The author investigates how the idea of GCS is conceptualized and whether its status as an "ideal type" obscures fundamental, implicit contradictions in its practical application and normative goals.
Which methodology is employed?
The paper utilizes a qualitative, discursive approach, synthesizing historical context and contemporary critical theory to analyze the limitations and contradictions inherent in the GCS concept.
What topics are discussed in the main body?
The main body covers the transition of civil society from historical western roots to modern global usage, the critique of its normative "goodness," and its dependency on international state funding and capitalist interests.
Which keywords best describe this work?
Keywords include Global Civil Society, state-society boundaries, hegemony, neoliberalism, power structures, normative contradictions, and global governance.
How does the author view the 'Batswanan kgotla' system?
The author uses the kgotla as a case study to demonstrate how civil society actors often operate within deeply rooted, inherited power structures rather than transforming them, challenging the assumption of GCS as an inherently revolutionary force.
What is the author's final conclusion regarding GCS?
The author concludes that GCS is not inherently "good" or "bad" but is a space of contested dynamics that, while currently limited by capitalist and statist interests, carries the potential for future, more active forms of global participation.
- Quote paper
- Jan Lüdert (Author), 2007, Global Civil Society - Third force in which direction? Or,the implicit contradiction of an idea, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/88481
