Global Civil Society?

by John Keane

Amid fears of terrorism, rising tides of xenophobia, and protests, John Keane explores the contradictory arguments and traces the historical origins, contemporary meanings and political potential of globalization. Defending the idea of a global civil society, Keane stresses the need for new democratic ways of living and demonstrates how it is linked with such developments as turbocapitalism, social movements and the political institutions of "cosmocracy." Keane's provocative reflections in Global Civil Society? draw upon a variety of scholarly sources and offer a fresh perspective on contemporary political thinking and new global problems. John Keane was born in Australia and educated at the Universities of Adelaide, Toronto and Cambridge. He is Professor of Politics at the University of Westminster. In 1989, he founded the Centre for the Study of Democracy. His most recent work is a study of power, Václav A Political Tragedy in Six Acts (Basic Books, 1999). His other books include Civil Old Images, New Visions (Stanford, 1998), Democracy and Civil Society (Verso Books, 1998), Reflections on Violence (Verso Books, 1996), the prizewinning Tom A Political Life (Little Brown, 1995), and The Media and Democracy (Blackwell, 1991). He has been awarded many fellowships and research grants and has lectured throughout the world; he often appears on radio and television and is a regular contributor to The Times Literary Supplement. Currently he is writing a full-scale history of democracy.

Genres: Nonfiction

236 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2003

About the author

John Keane is the professor of politics at the University of Sydney and the author of The Life and Death of Democracy.

Reviews

[Lina]

I was disappointed by this book. Perhaps I ventured into it with too many preconceptions. I was not looking to have the concept of a civil society introduced, but rather explored and its impact on international relations examined. I did not find that here.

There as a lot of flowery talk about how civil society is civil, and lot of conflicted discussion about including capitalism even though capitalism is "bad." I found the long discussion unnecessary, but perhaps the concept has strongly Marxist adherents who needed more convincing?

Equally conflicted discussion about the Euro/Western-centric nature of this civil society not being an example of cultural colonialism (even though the NGO's he referenced are based in the West and Western Academic institutions help standardize norms and cultural tendencies of those who attend?) Suffice to say that I had a real problem with this argument.

The text also made a very poor case for the impact of this Global Civil Society on IR. It spoke often of this activity being tied to peace and non-violence, but there was no case made that it cause/promoted peace/non-violence. In fact, wars were cited as having diminished some civil societies of the past. Knocks the legs out from under the rest of the argument.

There was also a whole section that discussed the democratizing effect of Civil Society, but in different words, which I did not find to add anything to our knowledge that was not already covered by Barrington Moore (who,in my opinion, writes terribly.)

Last but not least - if one is to use graphs, they should represent information, rather than be illustrations. I am not arguing for positivism, but there are illustrations in this book that look like graphs, but are really just armwavy pictures: http://books.google.com/books?id=9oWS...

Additionally, I think this concept has real analytically potential - there is actual data to be found if one looks. I would not advocate trying to dump in data where it does not belong, but in this case, it would be only too easy.

Overall, I was disappointed in this book. I arrived at it expecting to find an argument for an alternate level of analysis, succinct (useful) definitions for how to delineate Global Civil Society and perhaps some takes on where it is found. Perhaps an argument for its capacity to impact Global politics, and if I was lucky, some discussion of what the decentralized (truly market-like) nature of GSC implies for it's impact.

I fund very little of it in this book. It can be a good way to get someone thinking about Global Civil Society, but as an analysis of the idea, i felt like it kept of missing the point - coming close to glimpsing the concepts rich potential, but then turning back. I am however giving it the second start because it does touch on some valuable concepts.

I have also decided to never again pick up a book with a question mark in the title. If the author is not sufficiently certain of the books argument to put at least a period, if not an exclamation mark, it may be best to let the idea get sorted out first.

[Liquidlasagna]

Amazon review

More than a bright idea

Where does the concept 'global civil society' stem from, what does it really mean today? Where will the vision contained in the concept lead us? John Keane, the founder of the Centre for the Study of Democracy (UK) and leading thinker in the field, offers readers a thorough and well-argued set of answers and wide-ranging questions to consider.

'Global Civil Society' has developed into a catchphrase within the current globalization debate. This scholarly analysis of its historical origins debunks some widely held myths and contributes to a much clearer conceptualization.

Keane contends that past attempts to build global civil societies failed, drawing on examples from Christianity, Islam, ancient and more recent Empires and socialism Soviet style. To underpin his own definition of civil society, he cites numerous schools of thought. Characterizations range from very broad to very narrow. All concur that civil society is a counterbalance to government. Some see it as all encompassing - including all sectors of society except government. Others prefer a very narrow, idealist vision that restricts civil society to non-government, non-profit groupings that have a more or less common social and political agenda.

Modern Global Civil Society, he argues, has to be understood against the backdrop of the failures of the past. Whereas he accepts that Western European intellectual elites of the 19th century were among the catalysts for current global societal developments, he refutes the criticism of those who consider today's vision of Global Civil Society a Northern concept imposed on the rest of the world. The presence of strong and growing movements from Southern countries proves his point.

Global, regional or national inter-connected networks of widely differing non-governmental organizational configurations typify the modern civil society movements. Consequently, Keane states, global citizens today are not at all anti-globalization. Instead they are marked by a 'cross-border mentality', having created a 'special social space' from where they can challenge the powers that be, whether governmental or corporate. Keane identifies one important common thread among the movements: the mutual respect for diversity, compromise and connectivity.

He also reminds us of the complex interplay of civil society movements with their societal counterparts. Governments and the corporate sector, in particular today's 'turbocapitalists', have played a major role and the evolution of civil society. Recognizing that the dynamics between civil society, governments and corporate business is often contradictory, Keane urges all players not to be discouraged in working towards a new global system of governance. He insists that what is needed is bold new democratic thinking for a new world governance system - an 'unprecedented world polity' - which he defines as 'cosmocracy'. Cosmocracy is an evolving and dynamic system. Even though we do not have all the answers and aspects of it appear confusing and chaotic, reading Keane impels us to boldly go where no society has gone before...

While elements of this 'global conglomeration of interacting and overlapping institutions and processes' are in existence today, such as the UN, these are not adequate, as traditional thinking will not suffice. The diverse threats and vulnerabilities to global civil society can be addressed, he contends, as long as the gravest danger to its survival is prevented: fatalism.

Keane's investigation represents a major contribution to current thinking on global civil society and world governance systems. The meticulous referencing to his sources through extensive footnotes offers the reader more than a glimpse into the academic debates surrounding the issues raised by his study. Anybody with an interest in socio-political studies would be well advised to use this book as a starting point for research and a guide to further reading.

Friederike Knabe

[lena]

Used this book for my BA thesis. It‘s probably the only time during my degree that I read an academic publication in its entirety- and as such, I feel like it deserves to be counted toward my reading journey of the year. Thinking and writing about it definitely took years off my life. And Keane’s writing style very much got on my nerves.

[L]

Picked up from the shelf of my roommate who took Globalization and Social Conflict about five years before I did.

There are some beautiful sentences but overall it was the kind of book that used a permutation of "kaleidoscope" four times. I can't avoid feeling some scorn for books that are between 200 and 210 pages - really, you can both make your point and abide by the outline that had you finished at 200.

I didn't realize GCS included business. It makes sense, I guess, there are for-profit entities who enact positive social change. And by and large business prefers a politically stable, peaceful and predictable society. However, I had always conceived of GCS being set up in opposition to multinational corporations, and I certainly hold that there are companies and even industries who act to the detriment of civil society: war profiteers and other military-industrial complex groups, let alone big oil or Bechtel or corporations that incite conflict. In Keane's definition, GCS stands across from nation-states. In my world view the aims of GCS and the public sector overlap, and often work in concert.

p.26 - a historical model for sustaining agricultural infrastructure without migrant farm labor? like a CSA co-op built on contributions of labor-hours?
(cites Mundy&Riesenberg's The Medieval Town)
"Towns like Bruges, Genoa, Nurembers and London resembled electric transformers..[Town-dwellers] travelled regularly to and fro among built-up areas and regularly spent only part of their lives there; during harvest-times, for instance, artisans and others typically abandoned their trades and houses for work in fields elsewhere."

p.106 - "Clumsy government has all sorts of desirable features - like the power-sharing that comes with a plurality of institutions marked by 'useful inefficiencies' - certainly when compared with the unworkable normative ideal of designing institutions that are rigidly geometric in style and strategy."

p.118 - "a lack of public-friendly, well-trained administrative staff ensures that many parts of the cosmocracy are closed off from either mutual or public scrutiny of any kind. They come to feel like an impenetrable jungle of acronyms. Matters are worsened by the tyranny of distance: despite the noblest of public-spirited motives, decisionmakers tend to lose track of their decisions..."