 |
| Women Trading on Market day, Karamti, Taraba, Nigeria |
INTRODUCTION
Civil
society, as a social science concept defies any clear cut universally
acceptable definition. It is in fact, one of such areas in which definitions
are on the basis of operational nature (Laine, 2014). Indeed, as an abstract
term that clearly, is not confined any limit and without operational border,
civil society operations become such a complex field to conceptualise. CIVICUS (2011)
for instance, defines civil society as an arena outside the family, the state,
and the market which is created by individuals, collective actions,
organisations and institutions to advance shared interest (CIVICUS, 2011 in
Kojo and Van Dyck, 2012). Going by this definition alone one can quickly
discern that there is no single sphere where the operations of civil society
can be pinned to. Hence, Laine (2014) asserts that civil society is as complex
as society since the history of society itself could be termed as the history
of civil society.
On
account of this, the sphere of civil society abound. From humanitarian
activities to legal; from development to commercial; from legal to human
rights, civil society exist in their different forms. To this end, the theories
of civil society operations abound as it has clearly demonstrated over the
years, some civil society operations are fluid; some ad hoc; while some are
completely temporary. This makes it extremely difficult to maintain their
activities once the objectives and purpose for establishment has been achieved
depending on whose interests they serve (Bignami, 2016). Interests, therefore
are totally in discord even though a civil society may be same, but from both
extremes of the society, interests may differ- the source financing for civil
societies existing in third world countries may have variants of interests
ranging from genuine advancement of humanity to protection of national
interest, whereas at the other extreme from the global south, the operations of
the civil society may be for the operators of such civil society to line their
pockets: solving their financial needs rather than genuinely executing the
programmes of such civil society organisations (Clayton, Oakly & Taylor,
2000).
On
the part of the state, the statement is not quite different. Third world states
and emerging democracies, governments have increasingly found ways to sideline
civil society groups and undercut their activities in such a way they cannot
actually perform optimally towards achieving their set targets (Kojo & Van
Dyck, 2017). On account of this therefore, it becomes absolutely necessary to
underpin the operations of civil society operations to any single operational
theory. Never the less, theories of civil society operations abound as the
operations of civil society have taken different dimension since they became
active after a long absence in the early 1990s (Bignamy, 2016).
To
this end, this study seeks to examine the best operational theory that could
harmonise the activities of civil society to that of militarised groups such as
the military in order to reduce the level of reluctance in the operations of
civil society. In this regard, some of the various theories of civil society
operations would be looked in view of which of these theories guaranties
perfect civil society operations in a militarised environment.
HISTORY
OF CIVIL SOCIETY
Civil
society is as old as organised society itself since states in themselves have
not really existed the way they are seen today. Traditional states have in
themselves encouraged the formation of civil society whether consciously or
unconsciously (Bignamy, 2016). Even though the activities of civil had
experienced setbacks in the post West- Pharlia state model, especially after
the world wars and in the peak of the cold war. The level of global freedom has
not allowed for civil society to find operational efficacy until the collapse
of the Soviet Union (ibid). Having become ntralised in the post war period,
civil societies have found a resurgent period from 1992, with the fall of the
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) (CLain & Cheol- Sung, 2019). In
the present globalised era, the activities of civil society transcend
boundaries of traditional state. Hence, thecomposition and operational nature
of civil societies have gone cosmopolitan (Bignami. 2019). It is pertinent to
note that the democratisation process of hitherto, authoritarian states in post
cold has been the chief factor for the resurgence and vibrancy in civil society
formations and activities (Ibid).
REVIEWING
THEORIES OF CIVIL SOCIETY
Over the years, a lot of theories have
emerged concerning the operations of civil society. Some of these theories are
almost as old as society itself. These theories have aided in understanding and
analysing the operations of civil society organisations and how they could be
restructured to deliver on their operational programmes. These theories range
from pluralism, liberalism, social capital, multiculturalism, cosmopolitanism,
effective governance, and post modernism to mention but a few. It is important
the study reviews a few of these theories so as to extrapolate which of them
best suits the militarised and authoritarian states where organisations such as
the military can harmoniously exist alongside a vibrant civil society
organisation.
i.
Liberalism:
This theory
stems from the original work and ideas of Adam Smith, where it is believed a
free market economy is the best form in which individuals, groups and
associations have the free will to operate within the sphere of a provided
framework in order to attain their set objectives (Hill, 2010). It is a strong
submission that all in the state have natural liberties. Hence, they could
pursue their economic ends since all in the state are guaranteed equal freedom
to do so. The political strand of this theory is what has led to the liberal
democratic theory, where a lot of scholars have made far reaching
contributions. The studies of Putnam, Demontcrantine are some of the popular
works done on this theory. It is an over simplification to believe that civil
society groups will find the latitude to operate in such market economy where governments
do their best to keep interferences at bay.
ii.
Social Capital theory:
The social
capital, as a theory that scholars such as Warren have advanced, it is believed
that the collection of individuals through community efforts can penetrate the
social, economic and political sphere such that community efforts can help
promote development. In this regard, civil societies can harmonise their
activities to those of cultural associations, religious based associations,
Non- governmental organisations, and community based organisations to promote
certain interests of a particular group where the civil society specialises
(Hill, 2010), (Biganmi, 2016).
iii.
Multiculturalism:
In plural societies,
multiculturalism promotes the need to recognise every existing community,
culture, tribal affiliations, religious’ organisations for the special traits
they have and work collectively towards a single goal, especially in a
democratic community where the voice of every one matters. Within the ambit of
this theoretical make up, civil society organisations help to promote civil and
democratic ideals in order to have every group within the community have a
sense of belonging in a multicultural society (Bignami, 2016).
iv.
Effective Governance:
Government/civil
society relations in long run affect host communities in their modes of
operations. When governments effectively carry out their responsibilities,
civil societies find greater room to help them achieve their set targets. As
such, achieving targets are aided by governmental policies in such a way that
all groups benefit through forward/ backward infiltration of economic, social
and political spheres of society (Bignamy, 2016)
v.
Cosmopolitanism:
With increasingly
global penetration of humanitarian activities, virtually all human activities
have transcended national borders. Hence, the activities of civil society have
transcended national borders. As such they have become globalised in their
activities. This global cover helps them to set universally acceptable targets to
be evaluated on equal terms regardless of base of operation (Ibid)
vi.
Post- modernism:
A combination of all the social, economic, cultural,
religious and communal spheres are considered as a single unit such that all
aspects and all interests are aggregated to reflect the best outcomes are acted
upon. Through this theory, civil society finds it easy to implement its
programmes as all the aspects and sphere of the state are in harmony (Clayton,
Oakley & Taylor, 2000). Therefore, whenever the programme of one aspect of
the state is better than those of another, the other supports the
implementation of the better opinions of the others. Hence this is the best
theory that guarantees success to civil society groups.
CONCLUSION: CIVIL
SOCIETY AND MILITARY: OVERCOMING DISCORDANCE
A review
of all the strengths weaknesses of civil society theories has proven that Post-
modernism has demonstrated the operational ability of groups in communities to
adapt to the ever dynamic nature of society. As such, post- modernism
guarantees the best model for adjustments of interest by all interest groups
and stake holders prevalent in a state. The military, being one of the sub-
organs of the government whose interest may most times differ from those of the
civil society, once all groups recognise the capacity of all groups to make
decisions which are possibly better than its own, the tendency is definitely
that these other groups will listen; accord respect and help in implementing
the programmes of these other groups without ill- will or contempt. This way,
both the military and civil society can work together to achieve that which is
best for the state both in democratic and development since all are working
towards humanitarian ends- the military protects human life while civil society
helps to advance it. Whatever grievances may arise there in, legal provisions
facilitates a smooth resolution to such. In the end, humanity advances not at
the detriment of one section over the other through post modernism.
REFERENCES
Bignami,
F. (2016), theories of Civil Society and Global Administrative law: the Case of
the World Bank and International Development. George Washington Law Faculty. Pp
2- 8
Clayton,
A. Oakley, P. & Taylor, J. (2000), Civil Society Organistions and Service
Provisions, Civil Society and Social Movements, United Nations Research
Institute for Social Development. Geneva. P. 6
Hill,
L. (2010), Civil Society theory; research gate Journal (2010),
Klein,
S. & Cheol- Sung, L (2019), Towards a Dynamis theory of Civil Society; the
political theory of forward and backward infiltration, American Sociological
Association (2019) vol.37 (1) pp. 62- 68
Kojo,
C. & Van Dyck, J. (2017), Concept and Definition of Civil Society
Sustainability, Centre for Strategic International Studies. Human rights
Initiative. Pp 1-5
Laine,
J (2014), Debating Civil Society: Contested Conceptualisations and Development
Tragectories. International Journal of Not- for Profit Law/ vol. 16, No. 1
September, 2104. Pp 1, 65, 66 & 72
No comments:
Post a Comment