The Idea of Global Civil Society by Mary Kaldor - Essay Example

The Idea of Global Civil Society by Mary Kaldor The definition of global civil society is a pertinent issue in modern society. The paper is aimed to discuss the idea of global civil society presented by Mary Kaldor. The idea was based on query regarding the primacy of state due to continuous influence of globalisation, rise of a system of global governance and upsurge of different movements and organizations for public debate on transnational and global contexts (Kaldor, 2003b, p.593). The main aim of the article is to present the evolution of the global civil society and the effects on international relations. The author explored the concept through discussion of changing meaning of civil society in different eras such. Changing Meanings of Civil Society Although roots of concept of civil society were connected to early philosophers, it was considered as a modern idea. Early modern thinkers believed that civil society was equal to the state defined by social contract. The concept evolved in the 19th century when civil society was defined as the ‘intermediate realm between family and state…which is the territory of mediation” of different issues in the society including economy, thus it is considered as the ‘achievement of the modern society’ (p.594). In the 20th century, the definition of civil society evolved again. It had been limited to the realm between state and family excluded from the market, thus, it included culture, ideology and political debate (p.594). The author stressed the core meaning of civil society through history. One factor was the presence of rules that govern the people made with consent. The evolution was brought about by changing ways of consent of the people and the changing pertinent issues needed to be given attention in the society. Civil society was defined as the ‘process individuals interact with another and with the political and economic authority’ (p.595). The second core characteristic of the definition of civil society was being ‘territorially tied.’ For that matter, unity due to social contract and territory also defined the constraints of civil society (p.595). The author presented a significant meaning of the concept. Based on the different references on the issue, Kaldor’s view was as a helpful synopsis of the concept since areas within the context of the global civil society. The view presented had important insights specifically due to the expertise of the author who is well versed on the topic (Kaldor, 2003a). Reinvention of Civil Society Reinvention of civil society through the context of different culture was discussed by the author. In the early modern period, concept of global civil society was used against militarized regimes. The Latin Americans fought dictatorship while the eastern Europeans fought totalitarianism. The concept had been described as autonomy, self-organization, withdrawal from statee or ‘anti-politics’ which brought about change in the governance from below, or from the people (Kaldor, 2003b, p.586). But due to changing needs of the people, interconnectedness and trends in travel and communication increased in the 20th century referred to as civil engagement. The author pointed out causes important in the issue of reinvention of the meaning of civil society. These causes included the strong support achieved from groups and organization in other countries and the international human rights legislation (p.587). In the period prior to the 90s, the concept was referred to as global technological civilization and was described as a post-totalitarian system (p.587-8). The reinvention of the civil society brought the system to a level wherein people cannot control change anymore (Eberly, 2008). A new level of civil society had been presented as the ‘withdrawal from the state and move towards global rules and institutions. The 1989 revolution brought about changes that were observed in the 90s (Kaldor, 2003b, p.588). Global Civil Society in 1990s The author presented paradigms of the concept of global civil society in the 90s. First paradigm was about the manner ‘new social movements’ used the concept to tackle issues in the society. These movements worked in transnational manner for global governance on the cost of overriding sovereignty. The 90s then was recognized by two names namely ‘humanitarian regime’ and period of anti-globalization movement (p.588). Second paradigm dealt with ‘neoliberal version’ the key role of NGOs. These groups were involved in social issues but considered as extension of the state, thus, cannot be recognized as part of the civil society. In addition, NGOs negatively affected the capability of the people to uphold their rights for debate and emancipation (p.589). The third paradigm was about ‘post modern version’ which dealt origin of the concept of global civil society referred to as being Eurocentric which resulted in the establishment of groups with religious objectives due to the need to practice of their own rights in the civil society (p.590) Based on the paradigms, the author defined global civil society as a ‘platform inhabited by social groups where arguments were undertaken to achieve arrangements for global development in a non-democratic manner.’ From the definition that involved individual emancipation to the level wherein institutions and social groups became the representative of the civil society, the concept gave chances to debate pertinent issues (p.590). The definition is an approachable view that can be understood even by ordinary people not involved in politics, thus, the article by Kaldor is an important eye opener and introduction to the concept. After September 11 The last part was about recent issue on terrorist attack of September 11. She presented that terror is an attack against global civil society through fear and insecurity. It was pointed out that Bush made a wrong call in saying that the attack targeted US as a nation and not as a member of the global civil society. This resulted to a definite division in the international community. It was imposed that instead of resolving the issue through the application of the concept, war became the answer and years of the application of the concept of global civil society had been thrown away which polarised the world into different beliefs and factions (Kaldor, 2003b, p.591-2). Important perspectives and views regarding the concept were presented by the author but in this particular part, there is a hint of impartiality even to the point of being propaganda. The author presented the view in a manner that affirmed that the concept is Eurocentric. Although this is not true since a lot of works such as Eberly (2008) and Anheier and Themudo (2002) presented their views on the concept. Conclusion The article by Kaldor is a very informative and insightful work. It is an important piece to introduce the concept of global civil society due to the general and holistic approach that it presented. Presenting the issue in a more theoretical and philosophical manner rather than based on empirical or statistical evidences cannot be a basis for criticism but it would help the discussion. The last part that discussed the terrorism can be considered as the main criticism. The author concluded the article with the insight that global civil society met a challenge it cannot resolve and was limited to domestic violence. There is a pressing need to find a solution to global violence. Bibliography Anheier, H. and Themudo, N. (2002) Implications of Going Global. In Organizational Forms of Global Civil Society Chapter 8, p. 191-216 [online]. Available from [Accessed 30 October 2010]. Eberly, D.E. (2008) The Rise of Global Civil Society: Building Communities and Nations from the Bottom Up. Encounter Books. Kaldor, M. (2003a) Global Civil Society: An Answer to War. Wiley-Blackwell. Kaldor, M. (2003b) The Idea of Global Civil Society. International Affairs, 79 (3), p. 583-93. Read More