Civil society

Civil society can be understood as the

"third sector" of society, distinct from
government and business, and including
the family and the private sphere.[1] By
other authors, civil society is used in the
sense of 1) the aggregate of non-
governmental organizations and
institutions that advance the interests and
will of citizens or 2) individuals and
organizations in a society which are
independent of the government.[2]

International Civil Society Week 2019

Sometimes the term civil society is used in

the more general sense of "the elements
such as freedom of speech, an
independent judiciary, etc, that make up a
democratic society" (Collins English
Dictionary).[3] Especially in the discussions
among thinkers of Eastern and Central
Europe, civil society is seen also as a
normative concept of civic values.
Etymology
The term civil society goes back to
Aristotle's phrase koinōnía politikḗ
(κοινωνία πολιτική), occurring in his
Politics, where it refers to a 'political
community' commensurate with the Greek
city-state (polis), describing a group
established by human individuals for the
sake of their collective survival.[4] The telos
or end of civil society, thus defined, was
eudaimonia (τὸ εὖ ζῆν, tò eu zēn) (often
translated as human flourishing or
common well-being), in as man was
defined as a ‘political (social) animal’
(ζῷον πολιτικόν zōon politikón).[5][6][7][8]
The concept was used by Roman writers,
such as Cicero, where it referred to the
ancient notion of a republic (res publica). It
re-entered into Western political discourse
following one of the late medieval
translations of Aristotle's Politics into Latin
by Leonardo Bruni who as a first translated
koinōnía politikḗ into societas civilis. With
the rise of a distinction between
monarchical autonomy and public law, the
term then gained currency to denote the
corporate estates (Ständestaat) of a
feudal elite of land-holders as opposed to
the powers exercised by the prince.[9] It
had a long history in state theory, and was
revived with particular force in recent
times, in Eastern Europe, where dissidents
such as Václav Havel as late as in the
1990s employed it to denote the sphere of
civic associations threatened by the
intrusive holistic state-dominated regimes
of Communist Eastern Europe.[10] The first
post-modern usage of civil society as
denoting political opposition stems from
writings of Aleksander Smolar in 1978–
79.[11] However, the term was not in use by
Solidarity labor union in 1980–1981.[11]

Democracy
The literature on relations between civil
society and democratic political society
has its immediate origins in Scottish
Enlightenment philosophy, including Adam
Ferguson's An Essay on the History of Civil
Society, and in the work of G. W. F. Hegel,
from whom the concepts were adapted by
Alexis de Tocqueville,[12] Karl Marx,[13] and
Ferdinand Tönnies. They were developed in
significant ways by 20th century
researchers Gabriel Almond and Sidney
Verba, who identified the role of political
culture in a democratic order as vital.[14]

They argued that the political element of

political organizations facilitates better
awareness and a more informed citizenry,
who make better voting choices,
participate in politics, and hold
government more accountable as a
result.[14] Civil society acts as a forum for
people with common goals and interests
to further develop democratic ideals,
which in turn can lead to a more
democratic state.[15] Membership in these
kinds of associations serves as a source
of information which reduces the barriers
to collective action.[16] These groups then
affect policy by putting pressure on
governments.[17] This implies that civil
society serves to balance the power of the
state.[18] The statutes of these political
organizations have been considered micro-
constitutions because they accustom
participants to the formalities of
democratic decision making.

More recently, Robert D. Putnam has

argued that even non-political
organizations in civil society are vital for
democracy because they build social
capital, trust, and shared values within a
society.[19] Social capital, as defined as the
social networks and norms of reciprocity
associated with them, can help societies
resolve dilemmas of collective action;
individuals with dense social networks are
more likely to credibly commit to other
members of society and leverage their
social capital to build public goods.[19] In
turn, countries with strong civil societies
are more likely to succeed as
democracies. Some scholars have built on
Putnam’s claim and argued that the
participation of a specific type of civil
society organization—non-political
organizations rooted in quotidian
relationships—in the democratic transition
process is what drives successful
democratic transitions.[20] Gianfranco
Poggi argues this as well, saying that
interpersonal trust is needed if republican
society is to be maintained.[21]

Others, however, have questioned the link

between civil society and robust
democracy. As Thomas Carothers points
out, civil societies do not necessarily form
for worthy reasons nor do they necessarily
promote democratic values.[22] For
example, Sheri Berman argued that civil
society organizations can actually be used
to mobilize people against democracy.[23]
This was evident in fall of the Weimar
Republic in Germany. The Weimar
Republic’s failure to address the ravages
of economic depression, and domestic
struggles, led to the creation of a
multitude of German civil societies.[23] A
defining and arguable fatal flaw of these
groups was they reinforced societal
conflicts and differences among
Germans.[24] This separation of German
society into individual social groups meant
they were incredibly vulnerable to
nationalist ideals.[24] Nazis infiltrated
these discontent groups where they
eventually became the backbone and
foundation for the party and its
propaganda.[23] As a result, the Nazi party
transformed itself from a place of political
irrelevancy to the largest party in the
German Reichstag after the 1932
elections.[25] Contrary to Putnam’s
argument, in this instance, a dense civil
society network had damaged democracy.
The Nazi Party exploited the societal
organization of Germany ultimately leading
to the fall of the nation's first ever republic.

Even in well-established democracies, the

proliferation of special interest groups—
which signal a strong civil society—can
potentially impede the functioning of
representative institutions and distort
policy outcomes in favor of the wealthy,
well-connected, or well-organized.[26]
Moreover, based on survey data collected
by Kenneth Newton, there is little evidence
that social and political trust overlap,
which renders the relationship between the
strength of civil society and democracy
obsolete.[27] Indeed, as Larry Diamond
asserts, in order to understand the
multitude of ways civil society can serve
democracy, it is also necessary to
understand the tensions and
contradictions civil society generates for
democracy.[28]

In the United States, Tocqueville states

that the tendency to form associations
that would manifest into civil societies has
propelled its success as a democratic
government.[29] Putnam argues that the
strength of civil societies in the U.S. have
historically brought more social trust and
more social capital for citizens.[30] Others
state that a dependence on civil societies
can lead citizens to question the
effectiveness of the U.S. government and
can create instability by dividing society.[31]

In modern America, Yuval Levin writes that

civil societies are considered to be a
gateway between the U.S. government and
citizens[32] Some state that civil societies
help maintain individual freedoms as a
check to the U.S. government’s power,
while others see its role as upholding the
state’s efforts by helping it fuel social
causes while constraining the un-
democratic consolidation of power.[32]
Others, such as David Rieff, point out that
the U.S. government is more financially
equipped to work on social causes than
civil societies like NGOs, who prove
inadequate due to their lack of relative
strength.[33] Research by Harvard
professor Theda Skocpol indicates that
though civil societies have brought more
democracy to America, the shift from large
unions and organizations to smaller
movements targeting specific political
issues is less likely to spurn large-scale
participation in democracy.[34] Galston and
Levine state these new civil societies have
proved to be less likely to engage in the
political process and more likely to bring
social activism.[35]
Political participation
Civil society organizations provide citizens
with knowledge crucial to political
participation, such as the obligations and
rights of citizens with regard to
government processes, different types of
political issues and policy agendas, ways
in which citizens can collaborate to
address societal issues, and approaches
to creating meaningful change in
communities.[36] Dr. Carew E. Boulding and
Dr. Jami Nelson-Núñez assert that civil
society organizations are beneficial in that
citizens are more inclined to participate
politically when they can act collectively
and develop associative solidarities with
others around shared policy
preferences.[16] Other scholars, however,
note that there are some drawbacks of
civil society organizations as it pertains to
political participation and policy
processes.[37] Dr. Thomas Carothers
explains that, because civil society
organizations have such an influential role
in political participation, the proliferation of
these organizations has made it
increasingly difficult for governments to
meet both the widening range of policy
preferences and rapidly changing social
needs.[37] The scholar David Rieff
discusses another issue tied to civil
society and political participation: single-
issue activism.[38] Since most civil society
organizations focus on one sector or
societal issue, this sometimes causes
voters to shift their attention away from
the multifaceted broad issues facing
society, such as the challenges of
globalization, and instead the focus of
elections becomes centered on a few
specific hot-button topics, such as
abortion.[38]

There is a considerable amount of data

supporting the notion that civil society
organizations significantly increase
political participation.[39] Dr. Robert
Putnam conducted a study of civil society
in Italy in the mid-1900s, and observed that
those who were engaged with civil society
organizations demonstrated greater
“political sophistication, social trust,
political participation, and ‘subjective civic
competence’” than those not involved in
these organizations.[40] Similarly, Dr. Sheri
Berman found that the NSDAP (Nazi Party)
civil society organization leveraged strong
civil society networks among the middle
class together for the purpose of
mobilizing for political participation in
Germany.[41] The powerful influence of
these efforts is evidenced by the NSDAP
becoming the most potent political force in
the nation in the mid-1900s.[41] These case
studies provide evidence of the crucial role
of social networks in facilitating political
participation and civic engagement.[42]

Economics
A strong civil society is often considered
to be important for economic growth, with
reasoning being that it can give important
input on economic decisions, facilitate
private enterprise and entrepreneurship,
and prevent the state from stifling the
economy.[43] For example, labor leaders
can ensure that economic growth benefits
working people, faith leaders can advocate
for greater inclusion in economic affairs,
NGOs can flag and document harmful
business practices, etc.[44]

Essentially, civil society creates social

capital, which the World Bank defines as
"the institutions, relationships, and norms
that shape the quality and quantity of a
society's social interactions".[45] With
higher social capital comes a greater
amount of social interdependence, which
increases productivity and economic
growth.[45] For example, one study found
that high school drop out rates in areas
within the United States with better social
networks were lower than in areas with
weaker social networks.[46]
Some, like Thomas Carothers, somewhat
dispute this narrative.[43] He argues that
although civil society is beneficial toward
economic growth, it is not necessary,
which he illustrates through how South
Korea's great economic success was built
without a strong civil society, which only
appeared after economic growth had more
than took off, as well as how Bangladesh,
with an incredibly rich civil society, has
largely failed to grow its economy,
remaining one of the poorest countries in
the world.[43] Going even further, Carothers
also points out how too much civil society,
at least in certain sectors, can lead to
harmful economic impacts, citing how
some economists believe labor unions in
Latin America have restricted economic
growth.[43]

Constitutional economics
Constitutional economics is a field of
economics and constitutionalism which
describes and analyzes the specific
interrelationships between constitutional
issues and functioning of the economy
including budget process. The term
"constitutional economics" was used by
American economist James M. Buchanan
as a name for a new budget planning and
the latter's transparency to the civil society,
are of the primary guiding importance to
the implementation of the rule of law. Also,
the availability of an effective court
system, to be used by the civil society in
situations of unfair government spending
and executive impoundment of any
previously authorized appropriations,
becomes a key element for the success of
any influential civil society.[47]

Global

Civil lecture at Budapest Brainbar

Critics and activists currently often apply

the term civil society to the domain of
social life which needs to be protected
against globalization, and to the sources
of resistance thereto, because it is seen as
acting beyond boundaries and across
different territories.[48] However, as civil
society can, under many definitions,
include and be funded and directed by
those businesses and institutions
(especially donors linked to European and
Northern states) who support
globalization, this is a contested use.[49]
Rapid development of civil society on the
global scale after the fall of the
communist system was a part of neo-
liberal strategies linked to the Washington
Consensus.[50] Some studies have also
been published, which deal with
unresolved issues regarding the use of the
term in connection with the impact and
conceptual power of the international aid
system (see for example Tvedt 1998).

On the other hand, others see globalization

as a social phenomenon expanding the
sphere of classical liberal values, which
inevitably led to a larger role for civil
society at the expense of politically
derived state institutions.

The integrated Civil Society Organizations

(iCSO) System,[51] developed by the
Department of Economic and Social
Affairs (DESA), facilitates interactions
between civil society organizations and
DESA.[52]

Civil societies also have become involved

in the environmental policy making
process. These groups impact
environmental policies by setting an
agenda on fixing the harm done to the
environment. They also get the public
informed about environmental issues,
which increases the public demand for
environmental change.[53]
History
From a historical perspective, the actual
meaning of the concept of civil society has
changed twice from its original, classical
form. The first change occurred after the
French Revolution, the second during the
fall of communism in Europe.

Western antiquity

The concept of civil society in its pre-

modern classical republican
understanding is usually connected to the
early-modern thought of Age of
Enlightenment in the 18th century.
However, it has much older history in the
realm of political thought. Generally, civil
society has been referred to as a political
association governing social conflict
through the imposition of rules that
restrain citizens from harming one
another.[54] In the classical period, the
concept was used as a synonym for the
good society, and seen as
indistinguishable from the state. For
instance, Socrates taught that conflicts
within society should be resolved through
public argument using ‘dialectic’, a form of
rational dialogue to uncover truth.
According to Socrates, public argument
through ‘dialectic’ was imperative to
ensure ‘civility’ in the polis and ‘good life’
of the people.[55] For Plato, the ideal state
was a just society in which people
dedicate themselves to the common good,
practice civic virtues of wisdom, courage,
moderation and justice, and perform the
occupational role to which they were best
suited. It was the duty of the ‘philosopher
king’ to look after people in civility.
Aristotle thought the polis was an
‘association of associations’ that enables
citizens to share in the virtuous task of
ruling and being ruled.[54] His koinonia
politike as political community.
The concept of societas civilis is Roman
and was introduced by Cicero. The
political discourse in the classical period,
places importance on the idea of a ‘good
society’ in ensuring peace and order
among the people. The philosophers in the
classical period did not make any
distinction between the state and society.
Rather they held that the state represented
the civil form of society and ‘civility’
represented the requirement of good
citizenship.[54] Moreover, they held that
human beings are inherently rational so
that they can collectively shape the nature
of the society they belong to. In addition,
human beings have the capacity to
voluntarily gather for the common cause
and maintain peace in society. By holding
this view, we can say that classical
political thinkers endorsed the genesis of
civil society in its original sense.

The Middle Ages saw major changes in the

topics discussed by political philosophers.
Due to the unique political arrangements of
feudalism, the concept of classical civil
society practically disappeared from
mainstream discussion. Instead
conversation was dominated by problems
of just war, a preoccupation that would
last until the end of Renaissance.
Early modern history

The Thirty Years' War and the subsequent

Treaty of Westphalia heralded the birth of
the sovereign states system. The Treaty
endorsed states as territorially-based
political units having sovereignty. As a
result, the monarchs were able to exert
domestic control by circumventing the
feudal lords by raising their own armed
troops.[56] Henceforth, monarchs could
form national armies and deploy a
professional bureaucracy and fiscal
departments, which enabled them to
maintain direct control and authority over
their subjects. In order to meet
administrative expenditures, monarchs
exerted greater control over the economy.
This gave birth to absolutism.[57] Until the
mid-eighteenth century, absolutism was
the hallmark of Europe.[57]

The absolutist concept of the state was

disputed in the Enlightenment period.[58]
As a natural consequence of Renaissance,
Humanism, and the scientific revolution,
the Enlightenment thinkers raised
fundamental questions such as "What
legitimacy does heredity confer?", "Why are
governments instituted?", "Why do some
human beings have more basic rights than
others?", and so on. These questions led
them to make certain assumptions about
the nature of the human mind, the sources
of political and moral authority, the
reasons behind absolutism, and how to
move beyond absolutism. The
Enlightenment thinkers believed in the
power of the human mind to reason. They
opposed the alliance between the state
and the Church as the enemy of human
progress and well-being because the
coercive apparatus of the state curbed
individual liberty and the Church
legitimated monarchs by positing the
theory of divine origin. Therefore, both
were deemed to be against the will of the
people.
Strongly influenced by the atrocities of
Thirty Years' War, the political philosophers
of the time held that social relations
should be ordered in a different way from
natural law conditions. Some of their
attempts led to the emergence of social
contract theory that contested social
relations existing in accordance with
human nature. They held that human
nature can be understood by analyzing
objective realities and natural law
conditions. Thus they endorsed that the
nature of human beings should be
encompassed by the contours of state
and established positive laws. Thomas
Hobbes underlined the need of a powerful
state to maintain civility in society. For
Hobbes, human beings are motivated by
self-interests (Graham 1997:23). Moreover,
these self-interests are often contradictory
in nature. Therefore, in state of nature,
there was a condition of a war of all
against all. In such a situation, life was
"solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short"
(Ibid: 25). Upon realizing the danger of
anarchy, human beings became aware of
the need of a mechanism to protect them.
As far as Hobbes was concerned,
rationality and self-interests persuaded
human beings to combine in agreement, to
surrender sovereignty to a common power
(Kaviraj 2001:289). Hobbes called this
common power, state, Leviathan.

John Locke had a similar concept to

Hobbes about the political condition in
England. It was the period of the Glorious
Revolution, marked by the struggle
between the divine right of the Crown and
the political rights of Parliament. This
influenced Locke to forge a social contract
theory of a limited state and a powerful
society. In Locke's view, human beings led
also an unpeaceful life in the state of
nature. However, it could be maintained at
the sub-optimal level in the absence of a
sufficient system (Brown 2001:73). From
that major concern, people gathered
together to sign a contract and constituted
a common public authority. Nevertheless,
Locke held that the consolidation of
political power can be turned into
autocracy, if it is not brought under reliable
restrictions (Kaviraj 2001:291). Therefore,
Locke set forth two treaties on
government with reciprocal obligations. In
the first treaty, people submit themselves
to the common public authority. This
authority has the power to enact and
maintain laws. The second treaty contains
the limitations of authority, i. e., the state
has no power to threaten the basic rights
of human beings. As far as Locke was
concerned, the basic rights of human
beings are the preservation of life, liberty
and property. Moreover, he held that the
state must operate within the bounds of
civil and natural laws.

Both Hobbes and Locke had set forth a

system, in which peaceful coexistence
among human beings could be ensured
through social pacts or contracts. They
considered civil society as a community
that maintained civil life, the realm where
civic virtues and rights were derived from
natural laws. However, they did not hold
that civil society was a separate realm
from the state. Rather, they underlined the
co-existence of the state and civil society.
The systematic approaches of Hobbes
and Locke (in their analysis of social
relations) were largely influenced by the
experiences in their period. Their attempts
to explain human nature, natural laws, the
social contract and the formation of
government had challenged the divine right
theory. In contrast to divine right, Hobbes
and Locke claimed that humans can
design their political order. This idea had a
great impact on the thinkers in the
Enlightenment period.

The Enlightenment thinkers argued that

human beings are rational and can shape
their destiny. Hence, no need of an
absolute authority to control them. Both
Jean-Jacques Rousseau, a critic of civil
society, and Immanuel Kant argued that
people are peace lovers and that wars are
the creation of absolute regimes (Burchill
2001:33). As far as Kant was concerned,
this system was effective to guard against
the domination of a single interest and
check the tyranny of the majority
(Alagappa 2004:30).

Modern history

G. W. F. Hegel[59] completely changed the

meaning of civil society, giving rise to a
modern liberal understanding of it as a
form of non-political society as opposed
to institutions of modern nation state.[12]
While in classical republicanism civil
society where synonymous with political
society, Hegel distinguished political state
and civil society, what was followed by
Tocqueville's distinction between civil and
political societies and associations,[12]
repeated by Marx and Tönnies.

Unlike his predecessors, Hegel considered

civil society (German: bürgerliche
Gesellschaft) as a separate realm, a
"system of needs", that is the, "[stage of]
difference which intervenes between the
family and the state".[60] Civil society is the
realm of economic relationships as it
exists in the modern industrial capitalist
society,[61] for it had emerged at the
particular period of capitalism and served
its interests: individual rights and private
property.[62] Hence, he used the German
term "bürgerliche Gesellschaft" to denote
civil society as "civilian society" – a sphere
regulated by the civil code. This new way
of thinking about civil society was
followed by Alexis de Tocqueville and Karl
Marx as well.[12] For Hegel, civil society
manifested contradictory forces. Being the
realm of capitalist interests, there is a
possibility of conflicts and inequalities
within it (ex: mental and physical aptitude,
talents and financial circumstances). He
argued that these inequalities influence the
choices that members are able to make in
relation to the type of work they will do.
The diverse positions in Civil Society fall
into three estates: the substantial estate
(agriculture), the formal estate (trade and
industry), and the universal estate (civil
society).[63] A man is able to choose his
estate, though his choice is limited by the
aforementioned inequalities. However,
Hegel argues that these inequalities enable
all estates in Civil Society to be filled,
which leads to a more efficient system on
the whole.
Karl Marx followed the Hegelian way of
using the concept of civil society. For
Marx, the emergence of the modern state
created a realm of civil society that
reduced society to private interests
competing against each other. Political
society was autonomized into the state,
which was in turn ruled by the bourgeois
class (consider also that suffrage only
belonged, then, to propertied men). Marx,
in his early writings, anticipated the
abolition of the separation between state
and civil society, and looked forward to the
reunification of private and public/political
realms (Colletti, 1975). Hence, Marx
rejected the positive role of state put forth
by Hegel. Marx argued that the state
cannot be a neutral problem solver. Rather,
he depicted the state as the defender of
the interests of the bourgeoisie. He
considered the state to be the executive
arm of the bourgeoisie, which would wither
away once the working class took
democratic control of society.[64]

The above view about civil society was

criticised by Antonio Gramsci (Edwards
2004:10). Departing somewhat from Marx,
Gramsci did not consider civil society as a
realm of private and alienated
relationships. Rather, Gramsci viewed civil
society as the vehicle for bourgeois
hegemony, when it just represents a
particular class. He underlined the crucial
role of civil society as the contributor of
the cultural and ideological capital
required for the survival of the hegemony
of capitalism.[65] Rather than posing it as a
problem, as in earlier Marxist conceptions,
Gramsci viewed civil society as the site for
problem-solving. Misunderstanding
Gramsci, the New Left assigned civil
society a key role in defending people
against the state and the market and in
asserting the democratic will to influence
the state.[66] At the same time, neo-liberal
thinkers consider civil society as a site for
struggle to subvert Communist and
authoritarian regimes.[67] Thus, the term
civil society occupies an important place in
the political discourses of the New Left
and neo-liberals.

Post-modern history

After decades of forbidden national

days, on the 15th of March, 1989, the
communist regime of Hungary
allowed people to celebrate the 1956
revolution. Parallel with the state
celebration at the National Museum,
independent organisations called the
public to gather at the statue of Petőfi
Sándor.

It is commonly believed that the post-

modern way of understanding civil society
was first developed by political opposition
in the former Soviet bloc East European
countries in the 1980s. However, research
shows that communist propaganda had
the most important influence on the
development and popularization of the
idea instead, in an effort to legitimize
neoliberal transformation in 1989.[11]
According to theory of restructurization of
welfare systems, a new way of using the
concept of civil society became a
neoliberal ideology legitimizing
development of the third sector as a
substitute for the welfare state. The recent
development of the third sector is a result
of this welfare systems restructuring,
rather than of democratization.[11]
From that time stems a political practice
of using the idea of civil society instead of
political society. Henceforth, postmodern
usage of the idea of civil society became
divided into two main ones: as political
society and as the third sector – apart
from plethora of definitions.[11] The
Washington Consensus of the 1990s,
which involved conditioned loans by the
World Bank and IMF to debt-laden
developing states, also created pressures
for states in poorer countries to shrink.[50]
This in turn led to practical changes for
civil society that went on to influence the
theoretical debate. Initially the new
conditionality led to an even greater
emphasis on "civil society" as a panacea,
replacing the state's service provision and
social care,[50] Hulme and Edwards
suggested that it was now seen as "the
magic bullet".

By the end of the 1990s civil society was

seen less as a panacea amid the growth
of the anti-globalization movement and the
transition of many countries to democracy;
instead, civil society was increasingly
called on to justify its legitimacy and
democratic credentials. This led to the
creation by the UN of a high level panel on
civil society.[68] However, in the 1990s with
the emergence of the nongovernmental
organizations and the new social
movements (NSMs) on a global scale, civil
society as a third sector became treated
as a key terrain of strategic action to
construct ‘an alternative social and world
order.’ Post-modern civil society theory
has now largely returned to a more neutral
stance, but with marked differences
between the study of the phenomena in
richer societies and writing on civil society
in developing states.

Link to the public sphere

Jürgen Habermas said that the public
sphere encourages rational will-formation;
it is a sphere of rational and democratic
social interaction.[69] Habermas analyzes
civil society as a sphere of "commodity
exchange and social labor" and public
sphere as a part of political realm.
Habermas argues that even though society
was representative of capitalist society,
there are some institutions that were part
of political society. Transformations in
economy brought transformations to the
public sphere. Though these
transformations happen, a civil society
develops into political society when it
emerges as non-economic and has a
populous aspect, and when the state is not
represented by just one political party.
There needs to be a locus of authority, and
this is where society can begin to
challenge authority. Jillian Schwedler
points out that civil society emerges with
the resurrection of the public sphere when
individuals and groups begin to challenge
boundaries of permissible behaviour – for
example, by speaking out against the
regime or demanding a government
response to social needs – civil society
begins to take shape.[70]

Institutions
Civil society organizations, also known as
civic organizations, include among others:

academia
activist groups
charities
clubs (sports, social, etc.)
community foundations
community organizations
consumer organizations
cooperatives
foundations
non-governmental organizations (NGOs)
non-profit organizations (NPOs)
private voluntary organizations (PVOs)
professional associations
religious organizations
 social enterprises
social movement organizations
statutory corporations
support groups
trade unions
voluntary associations

See also
Portal:Politics
Activism
Anarchism
Associationalism
Civic engagement
Civics
Civic space
Civic virtue
Civil affairs
Civil inattention
Civil liberties
Civil religion
Civil and political rights
Communitarianism
Communism
Constitutional economics
Coordination good
Cultural hegemony
Democracy
Foucault–Habermas debate
Global civics
Global governance
Human rights
Judiciary
Liberal nationalism
Mass society
Non-state actor
Open society
Political science
Public interest litigation
Rule of law
Rule According to Higher Law
 Social capital
Social economy
Social entrepreneurship
Social innovation
Sociology
Service organization
Power
Voluntary sector
Yearbook of International Organizations

Civil-society scholars

Jeffrey C. Alexander
Helmut Anheier
Andrew Arato
Phillip Blond
Benjamin Barber
Daniel Bell
Robert N. Bellah
Walden Bello
Jean L. Cohen
Michael Edwards
Jean Bethke Elshtain
Amitai Etzioni
Francis Fukuyama
Ernest Gellner
Susan George
Jürgen Habermas
Peter Dobkin Hall
Mary Kaldor
Barry Dean Karl
John Keane
David Korten
John W. Meyer
Frank Moulaert
Michael Oakeshott
Michael O'Neill
Elinor Ostrom
Robert D. Putnam
Michael Sandel
Charles Taylor
 Lori Wallach
Khurram Zaki

References

Citations

1. What is Civil Society (http://www.civilsoc.or

g/whatisCS.htm) civilsoc.org Archived (htt
ps://web.archive.org/web/2009050211172
5/http://www.civilsoc.org/whatisCS.htm)
2 May 2009 at the Wayback Machine
2. "Civil society – Define Civil society at
Dictionary.com" (http://dictionary.reference.
com/browse/civil+society?r=66) .
Dictionary.com. Archived (https://web.archi
ve.org/web/20141225095415/http://dictio
nary.reference.com/browse/civil+society?r
=66) from the original on 25 December
2014. Retrieved 24 January 2012.
3. "Civil society definition and meaning |
Collins English Dictionary" (https://www.col
linsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/civil-
society) . www.collinsdictionary.com.
Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/201
90428192043/https://www.collinsdictionar
y.com/dictionary/english/civil-society)
from the original on 28 April 2019.
Retrieved 25 November 2019.
4. Tugendhat, Ernst (1986). Self-
Consciousness and Self-Determination.
p. 239.
5. Aristotle, Politics, Bk. 1 passim, esp.
1252a1–6
6. Jean L. Cohen,Civil Society and Political
Theory, MIT Press, 1994 pp. 84–85.
7. Bruno Blumenfeld The Political Paul:
Democracy and Kingship in Paul's Thought,
Sheffield Academic Press, 2001 pp. 45–83
8. Michael Davis,The Politics of Philosophy: A
Commentary on Aristotle's Politics,
Rowman & Littlefield 1996 pp. 15–32
9. Jean L. Cohen,Civil Society and Political
Theory, MIT Press, 1994 p. 86.
10. Frederick W. Powell,The Politics of Civil
Society: Neoliberalism Or Social Left?,
Policy Press, 2007. pp. 119–20, 148–49.
11. Pawel Stefan Zaleski, Neoliberalizm i
spoleczenstwo obywatelskie
(Neoliberalism and Civil Society),
Wydawnictwo UMK, Torun 2012
12. Zaleski, Pawel Stefan (2008). "Tocqueville
on Civilian Society. A Romantic Vision of
the Dichotomic Structure of Social Reality"
(https://web.archive.org/web/2018100905
3108/http://zaleski.wex.pl/2008%20tocque
ville%20on%20civilian%20society.pdf)
(PDF). Archiv für Begriffsgeschichte. Felix
Meiner Verlag. 50. Archived from the
original (http://zaleski.wex.pl/2008%20toc
queville%20on%20civilian%20society.pdf)
(PDF) on 9 October 2018.
13. See, for example, Civil Society and the
Conception of History (https://www.marxist
s.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-id
eology/ch01b.htm#b1) Archived (https://w
eb.archive.org/web/20150102205347/htt
p://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/work
s/1845/german-ideology/ch01b.htm#b1)
2 January 2015 at the Wayback Machine in
the Critique of the German Ideology.
14. Almond, G., & Verba, S.; 'The Civic Culture:
Political Attitudes And Democracy In Five
Nations; 1989; Sage
15. Barber, Benjamin (1998). Place for us (htt
p://worldcat.org/oclc/173086879) . Hill &
Wang. ISBN 0-8090-7656-X.
OCLC 173086879 (https://www.worldcat.or
g/oclc/173086879) .
16. Boulding, Carew E.; Nelson-Núñez, Jami
(2014). "Civil Society and Support for the
Political System in Times of Crisis" (https://
www.jstor.org/stable/43670156) . Latin
American Research Review. 49 (1): 128–
154. doi:10.1353/lar.2014.0015 (https://do
i.org/10.1353%2Flar.2014.0015) .
ISSN 0023-8791 (https://www.worldcat.or
g/issn/0023-8791) . JSTOR 43670156 (htt
ps://www.jstor.org/stable/43670156) .
S2CID 73712285 (https://api.semanticscho
lar.org/CorpusID:73712285) . Archived (htt
ps://web.archive.org/web/2023030302375
7/https://www.jstor.org/stable/43670156)
from the original on 3 March 2023.
Retrieved 3 March 2023.
17. Carothers, Thomas (1997). "Think Again:
Democracy" (https://www.jstor.org/stable/
1149329) . Foreign Policy (107): 11–18.
doi:10.2307/1149329 (https://doi.org/10.2
307%2F1149329) . JSTOR 1149329 (http
s://www.jstor.org/stable/1149329) .
Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/202
30404141450/https://www.jstor.org/stabl
e/1149329) from the original on 4 April
2023. Retrieved 3 March 2023.
18. Fukuyama, Francis; FFukuyama@imf.org
(2000). "Social Capital and Civil Society" (ht
tps://elibrary.imf.org/openurl?genre=journa
l&issn=1018-5941&volume=2000&issue=0
74) . IMF Working Papers (74): 1.
doi:10.5089/9781451849585.001 (https://
doi.org/10.5089%2F9781451849585.00
1) . ISSN 1018-5941 (https://www.worldca
t.org/issn/1018-5941) . Archived (https://w
eb.archive.org/web/20230702101411/http
s://www.elibrary.imf.org/view/journals/00
1/2000/074/001.2000.issue-074-en.xml)
from the original on 2 July 2023. Retrieved
3 March 2023.
19. Robert D. Putnam, Robert Leonardi,
Raffaella Y. Nanetti; Robert Leonardi;
Raffaella Y. Nanetti (1994). Making
Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in
Modern Italy (https://archive.org/details/m
akingdemocracyw00putn) . Princeton
University Press. ISBN 0-691-07889-0.
20. Pinckney, Jonathan. "Organizations,
Resistance, and Democracy: How Civil
Society Organizations Impact
Democratization" (https://academic.oup.co
m/isq/article/66/1/sqab094/6514649) .
International Studies Quarterly. Archived (ht
tps://web.archive.org/web/202303030015
11/https://academic.oup.com/isq/article/6
6/1/sqab094/6514649) from the original
on 3 March 2023. Retrieved 3 March 2023.
21. D., Putnam, Robert (1993). Making
democracy work : civic traditions in modern
Italy (http://worldcat.org/oclc/24677901
9) . Princeton Univ. Press. ISBN 0-691-
07889-0. OCLC 246779019 (https://www.w
orldcat.org/oclc/246779019) . Archived (ht
tps://web.archive.org/web/202307021014
31/https://worldcat.org/title/246779019)
from the original on 2 July 2023. Retrieved
3 March 2023.
22. Carothers, Thomas; Barndt, William (1999).
"Civil Society" (https://www.jstor.org/stabl
e/1149558) . Foreign Policy. 117 (1999):
18–29. doi:10.2307/1149558 (https://doi.o
rg/10.2307%2F1149558) .
JSTOR 1149558 (https://www.jstor.org/sta
ble/1149558) . Archived (https://web.archi
ve.org/web/20230304000623/https://ww
w.jstor.org/stable/1149558) from the
original on 4 March 2023. Retrieved
3 March 2023.
23. Berman, Sheri (1997). "Civil Society and the
Collapse of the Weimar Republic" (https://w
ww.jstor.org/stable/25054008) . World
Politics. 49 (3): 401–429.
doi:10.1353/wp.1997.0008 (https://doi.or
g/10.1353%2Fwp.1997.0008) .
JSTOR 25054008 (https://www.jstor.org/st
able/25054008) . S2CID 145285276 (http
s://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:1452
85276) . Archived (https://web.archive.org/
web/20210607171209/https://www.jstor.o
rg/stable/25054008) from the original on
7 June 2021. Retrieved 3 March 2023.
24. Berman, Sheri (13 May 2021). "Revisiting
"Civil Society And The Collapse Of The
Weimar Republic" " (https://histphil.org/202
1/05/13/revisiting-civil-society-and-the-coll
apse-of-the-weimar-republic/) . HistPhil.
Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/202
30303030704/https://histphil.org/2021/0
5/13/revisiting-civil-society-and-the-collaps
e-of-the-weimar-republic/) from the
original on 3 March 2023. Retrieved
3 March 2023.
25. Voigtländer, Nico; Voth, Hans-Joachim;
Satyanath, Shanker (5 August 2013).
"Bowling for Adolf: How social capital
helped to destroy Germany's first
democracy" (https://cepr.org/voxeu/colum
ns/bowling-adolf-how-social-capital-helped
-destroy-germanys-first-democracy) .
VoxEU - CEPR. Archived (https://web.archiv
e.org/web/20230303030701/https://cepr.o
rg/voxeu/columns/bowling-adolf-how-soci
al-capital-helped-destroy-germanys-first-de
mocracy) from the original on 3 March
2023. Retrieved 3 March 2023.
26. Carothers, Thomas (1997). "Think Again:
Democracy" (https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/11
49329) . Foreign Policy (107): 11–18.
doi:10.2307/1149329 (https://doi.org/10.2
307%2F1149329) . ISSN 0015-7228 (http
s://www.worldcat.org/issn/0015-7228) .
JSTOR 1149329 (https://www.jstor.org/sta
ble/1149329) .
27. Newton, Kenneth (April 2001). "Trust, Social
Capital, Civil Society, and Democracy" (http
s://dx.doi.org/10.1177/019251210122200
4) . International Political Science Review.
22 (2): 201–214.
doi:10.1177/0192512101222004 (https://d
oi.org/10.1177%2F0192512101222004) .
ISSN 0192-5121 (https://www.worldcat.or
g/issn/0192-5121) . S2CID 145126824 (htt
ps://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:145
126824) . Archived (https://web.archive.or
g/web/20230702101411/https://journals.s
agepub.com/doi/10.1177/0192512101222
004) from the original on 2 July 2023.
Retrieved 3 March 2023.
28. Diamond, Larry Jay (1994). "Toward
Democratic Consolidation" (https://dx.doi.o
rg/10.1353/jod.1994.0041) . Journal of
Democracy. 5 (3): 4–17.
doi:10.1353/jod.1994.0041 (https://doi.or
g/10.1353%2Fjod.1994.0041) . ISSN 1086-
3214 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/1086
-3214) . S2CID 153922136 (https://api.sem
anticscholar.org/CorpusID:153922136) .
29. "Making democracy work" (http://archive.or
g/details/makingdemocracyw00putn) .
Princeton University Press. 11 March 1993.
Retrieved 11 March 2023 – via Internet
Archive.
30. Carothers, Thomas; Barndt, William (1999).
"Civil Society" (https://www.jstor.org/stabl
e/1149558) . Foreign Policy (117): 18–29.
doi:10.2307/1149558 (https://doi.org/10.2
307%2F1149558) . JSTOR 1149558 (http
s://www.jstor.org/stable/1149558) .
Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/202
30304000623/https://www.jstor.org/stabl
e/1149558) from the original on 4 March
2023. Retrieved 3 March 2023.
31. Berman, Sheri (1997). "Civil Society and the
Collapse of the Weimar Republic" (https://d
oi.org/10.1353/wp.1997.0008) . World
Politics. 49 (3): 401–429.
doi:10.1353/wp.1997.0008 (https://doi.or
g/10.1353%2Fwp.1997.0008) .
S2CID 145285276 (https://api.semanticsch
olar.org/CorpusID:145285276) .
32. "The American Context of Civil Society
(SSIR)" (https://ssir.org/articles/entry/the_a
merican_context_of_civil_society) . ssir.org.
Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/202
30304041221/https://ssir.org/articles/entr
y/the_american_context_of_civil_society)
from the original on 4 March 2023.
Retrieved 11 March 2023.
33. Rieff, David (4 February 1999). "The False
Dawn of Civil Society" (https://www.thenati
on.com/article/archive/false-dawn-civil-soc
iety/) . {{cite magazine}}: Cite
magazine requires |magazine= (help)

34. "Civil Society in the United States" (https://a

cademic.oup.com/edited-volume/28264/c
hapter/213409475#342690982) . Archived
(https://web.archive.org/web/2023030404
1207/https://academic.oup.com/edited-vol
ume/28264/chapter/213409475#3426909
82) from the original on 4 March 2023.
Retrieved 4 March 2023.
35. Why Civil Society? Why Now? (https://www.
brookings.edu/articles/why-civil-society-wh
y-now/) Archived (https://web.archive.org/
web/20230304041207/https://www.brooki
ngs.edu/articles/why-civil-society-why-no
w/) 4 March 2023 at the Wayback Machine
Brookings
36. "Civil Society | Social Science | Britannica"
(https://www.britannica.com/topic/civil-soc
iety) . www.britannica.com. Archived (http
s://web.archive.org/web/2023022107555
1/https://www.britannica.com/topic/civil-s
ociety) from the original on 21 February
2023. Retrieved 3 March 2023.
37. Carothers, Thomas; Barndt, William (1999).
"Civil Society" (https://www.jstor.org/stabl
e/1149558) . Foreign Policy (117): 18–29.
doi:10.2307/1149558 (https://doi.org/10.2
307%2F1149558) . ISSN 0015-7228 (http
s://www.worldcat.org/issn/0015-7228) .
JSTOR 1149558 (https://www.jstor.org/sta
ble/1149558) . Archived (https://web.archi
ve.org/web/20230304000623/https://ww
w.jstor.org/stable/1149558) from the
original on 4 March 2023. Retrieved
3 March 2023.
38. Rieff, David (4 February 1999). "The False
Dawn of Civil Society" (https://www.thenati
on.com/article/archive/false-dawn-civil-soc
iety/) . ISSN 0027-8378 (https://www.world
cat.org/issn/0027-8378) . Archived (http
s://web.archive.org/web/2023030400060
1/https://www.thenation.com/article/archiv
e/false-dawn-civil-society/) from the
original on 4 March 2023. Retrieved
4 March 2023.
39. Ingram, George (6 April 2020). "Civil
society: An essential ingredient of
development" (https://www.brookings.edu/
blog/up-front/2020/04/06/civil-society-an-
essential-ingredient-of-development/) .
Brookings. Archived (https://web.archive.or
g/web/20230304000624/https://www.bro
okings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/04/06/civil
-society-an-essential-ingredient-of-develop
ment/) from the original on 4 March 2023.
Retrieved 3 March 2023.
40. Putnam, Robert D.; Leonardi, Robert;
Nonetti, Raffaella Y. (27 May 1994). Making
Democracy Work (https://dx.doi.org/10.230
7/j.ctt7s8r7) . Princeton University Press.
doi:10.2307/j.ctt7s8r7 (https://doi.org/10.2
307%2Fj.ctt7s8r7) . ISBN 978-1-4008-
2074-0. Archived (https://web.archive.org/
web/20230702101914/https://apps.crossr
ef.org/coaccess/coaccess.html?doi=10.23
07%2Fj.ctt7s8r7) from the original on 2
July 2023. Retrieved 4 March 2023.
41. Berman, Sheri (1997). "Civil Society and the
Collapse of the Weimar Republic" (https://w
ww.jstor.org/stable/25054008) . World
Politics. 49 (3): 401–429.
doi:10.1353/wp.1997.0008 (https://doi.or
g/10.1353%2Fwp.1997.0008) . ISSN 0043-
8871 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/0043
-8871) . JSTOR 25054008 (https://www.jst
or.org/stable/25054008) .
S2CID 145285276 (https://api.semanticsch
olar.org/CorpusID:145285276) . Archived
(https://web.archive.org/web/2021060717
1209/https://www.jstor.org/stable/250540
08) from the original on 7 June 2021.
Retrieved 3 March 2023.
42. Galston, Peter Levine and William A.
(1997). "America's Civic Condition: A
Glance at the Evidence" (https://www.brook
ings.edu/articles/americas-civic-condition-
a-glance-at-the-evidence/) . Brookings.
Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/202
30304000623/https://www.brookings.edu/
articles/americas-civic-condition-a-glance-
at-the-evidence/) from the original on 4
March 2023. Retrieved 4 March 2023.
43. "Foreign Policy: Think Again: Civil Society"
(https://ciaotest.cc.columbia.edu/olj/fp/fp_
99cat01.html) . ciaotest.cc.columbia.edu.
Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/202
30519083032/https://ciaotest.cc.columbia.
edu/olj/fp/fp_99cat01.html) from the
original on 19 May 2023. Retrieved
11 March 2023.
44. "Civil Society" (https://www.weforum.org/c
ommunities/civil-society/) . World
Economic Forum. Archived (https://web.arc
hive.org/web/20230311110141/https://ww
w.weforum.org/communities/civil-societ
y/) from the original on 11 March 2023.
Retrieved 11 March 2023.
45. "Civil Society, Social Capital and Economic
Development" (https://ciaotest.cc.columbi
a.edu/isa/skd01/) .
ciaotest.cc.columbia.edu. Archived (https://
web.archive.org/web/20230522091512/htt
ps://ciaotest.cc.columbia.edu/isa/skd01/)
from the original on 22 May 2023.
Retrieved 11 March 2023.
46. Coleman, James S. (1988). "Social Capital
in the Creation of Human Capital" (https://w
ww.jstor.org/stable/2780243) . American
Journal of Sociology. 94: S95–S120.
doi:10.1086/228943 (https://doi.org/10.10
86%2F228943) . JSTOR 2780243 (https://
www.jstor.org/stable/2780243) .
S2CID 51859022 (https://api.semanticscho
lar.org/CorpusID:51859022) . Archived (htt
ps://web.archive.org/web/2023021206044
0/https://www.jstor.org/stable/2780243)
from the original on 12 February 2023.
Retrieved 3 March 2023.
47. Peter Barenboim, Natalya Merkulova. "The
25th Anniversary of Constitutional
Economics: The Russian Model and Legal
Reform in Russia, in The World Rule of Law
Movement and Russian Legal Reform (htt
p://philosophicalclub.ru/content/docs/worl
druleoflaw.pdf) Archived (https://web.arch
ive.org/web/20160705221504/http://philo
sophicalclub.ru/content/docs/worldruleofla
w.pdf) 5 July 2016 at the Wayback
Machine", edited by Francis Neate and Holly
Nielsen, Justitsinform, Moscow (2007).
48. Mann, Michael; 1984; "The Autonomous
Power of The State: Its Origins,
Mechanisms and Results"; European
Journal of Sociology 25: pp. 185–213
49. "NGOs NGO civil society partnerships UN
United Nations" (https://www.un.org/partne
rs/civil_society/home.htm) . un.org.
Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/201
70715024417/http://www.un.org/partners/
civil_society/home.htm) from the original
on 15 July 2017. Retrieved 28 June 2017.
50. Pawel Stefan Zaleski Global Non-
governmental Administrative System:
Geosociology of the Third Sector, [in:]
Gawin, Dariusz & Glinski, Piotr [ed.]: "Civil
Society in the Making," IFiS Publishers,
Warszawa 2006 [1] (http://zaleski.wex.pl/2
006%20global%20nongovernmental%20ad
ministrative%20system.pdf) Archived (http
s://web.archive.org/web/2018100905310
5/http://zaleski.wex.pl/2006%20global%20
nongovernmental%20administrative%20sys
tem.pdf) 9 October 2018 at the Wayback
Machine
51. "The integrated Civil Society Organizations
(iCSO) System" (http://esango.un.org/civils
ociety/login.do) . NGO Branch. United
Nations Department of Economic and
Social Affairs. Archived (https://web.archiv
e.org/web/20130204070747/http://esang
o.un.org/civilsociety/login.do) from the
original on 4 February 2013. Retrieved
4 July 2012.
52. Basta! Rio+20 Walkout (https://vimeo.com/
44625148) . Vimeo.
53. Dodge, Jennifer (5 June 2014). "Civil
society organizations and deliberative
policy making: interpreting environmental
controversies in the deliberative system".
Policy Sciences. 47 (2): 161–185.
doi:10.1007/s11077-014-9200-y (https://d
oi.org/10.1007%2Fs11077-014-9200-y) .
S2CID 143686130 (https://api.semanticsch
olar.org/CorpusID:143686130) .
54. Edwards 2004. p. 6.
55. O'Connell 1999
56. Brown 2001:70
57. Knutsen, Torbjorn L. (1997). History of
International Relations Theory (https://book
s.google.com/books?id=XejIDV8S3TUC&p
g=PA83) . Manchester University Press.
pp. 83–114. ISBN 9780719049309.
Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/202
30702101908/https://books.google.com/b
ooks?id=XejIDV8S3TUC&pg=PA83) from
the original on 2 July 2023. Retrieved
24 October 2022.
58. Chandhoke, Neera (1995). State and Civil
Society: Explorations in Political Theory.
Sage Publications. p. 88.
ISBN 9788170364764.
59. Hegel, G. W. F. (1821), PR § 157 (https://ww
w.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/w
orks/pr/prethica.htm#PR157) Archived (ht
tps://web.archive.org/web/202001102245
48/https://books.google.com/books?id=O5
XvGdmuTkkC&dq=#PR157) 10 January
2020 at the Wayback Machine
60. Hegel, G. F. W., Elements of the Philosophy
of Right, edited by Allen W. Wood
(Cambridge University Press, 1991), §184
61. Stillman, Peter G. Hegel’s Civil Society: A
Locus of Freedom, appearing in Polity, Vol.
12, No. 4 (Summer 1980), pp. 622–46. p.
623
62. Dhanagare, D.N. (September 2001). "Civil
Society, State and Democracy:
Contextualising a Discourse". Sociological
Bulletin. 50 (2): 169.
doi:10.1177/0038022920010201 (https://d
oi.org/10.1177%2F0038022920010201) .
JSTOR 23619837 (https://www.jstor.org/st
able/23619837) . S2CID 151968126 (http
s://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:1519
68126) .
63. Hegel, G. F. W., Elements of the Philosophy
of Right, edited by Allen W. Wood
(Cambridge University Press, 1991), §202
64. See V. I. Lenin, Imperialism, the Highest
Stage of Capitalism, (2010), for a summary
of Marx's thought on the State and an
introduction to Marxist thought on the state
up until 1917. For a detailed discussion of
Marx's thought on the state and civil society
see Draper, 1977 & 1986 (Volumes 1 and 2)
65. Ehrenberg 1999:208
66. Ehrenberg 1999:30
67. Ehrenberg 1999:33
68. "Reforming the United Nations" (https://we
b.archive.org/web/20081002044238/htt
p://www.un.org/reform/civilsociety/bios.sh
tml) . Archived from the original on 2
October 2008. Retrieved 8 October 2008.
69. Habermas, J. (1974). The public sphere: an
encyclopaedia article. New German
Critique, 3, 49–55.
70. Schwedler, 1995:5

Sources

Alagappa, Muthiah. Civil Society and Political

Change in Asia. Stanford: Stanford University
Press, 2004. ISBN 0-8047-5097-1
Colletti, Lucio. ‘Introduction’, in Karl Marx,
Early Writings, Pelican, 1975, pp. 7–56.
ISBN 0140216685.
Edwards, Michael. Civil Society. Cambridge,
England: Polity Press, 2004. ISBN 0-7456-
3133-9.
Draper, Hal. Karl Marx's Theory of Revolution
(Volume 1: State and Bureaucracy, Volume 2:
The Politics of Social Classes). New York:
Monthly Review Press, 1977 & 1986.
Ehrenberg, John. Civil Society: The Critical
History of an Idea. New York: New York
University Press, 1999.
Ginsborg, Paul. Italy and Its Discontents:
Family, Civil Society, State (2003)
Gosewinkel, Dieter: Civil Society (http://nbn-re
solving.de/urn:nbn:de:0159-20101025280) ,
European History Online, Mainz: Institute of
European History, 2011, retrieved: 24 August
2011.
Hemmati, Minu. Dodds, Felix. Enayati,
Jasmin. and McHarry,Jan downloadable copy
of Multistakeholder Processes for Governance
and Sustainability:Beyond Deadlock and
Conflict (https://web.archive.org/web/201603
04091728/http://www.earthsummit2002.org/
msp/book.html)
O'Connell, Brian. Civil Society: The
Underpinnings of American Democracy.
Medford, Mass:Tufts University Press, 1999.
ISBN 0-87451-924-1.
Perlas, Nicolas. Shaping Globalization – Civil
Society, Cultural Power and Threefolding.
ISBN 0-9583885-8-X.
Pollock, Graham. "Civil Society Theory and
Euro-Nationalism," Studies In Social & Political
Thought , Issue 4, March 2001, pp. 31–56.
online (https://web.archive.org/web/2012092
8072145/http://www.sussex.ac.uk/cspt/docu
ments/issue4-3.pdf)
Soper, Steven C. Building a Civil Society:
Associations, Public Life, and the Origins of
Modern Italy (2013)
Tvedt, Terje. Angels of Mercy or Development
Diplomats. NGOs & Foreign Aid. Oxford:
James Currey, 1998.
Whaites, Alan, Let's get civil society straight:
NGOs and Political Theory, Development in
Practice, 1996, [2] (http://publications.oxfam.
org.uk/oxfam/results.asp?sf_20=oxfam_arch
ive_flag&st_20=NOT+Y&sf_01=CAUTHOR&T
AG=&CID=&st_01=whaites&SORT=SORT_DA
TE%2FD&x=0&y=0)
Whaites, Alan, NGOs, Civil Society and the
State: Avoiding theoretical extremes in real
world issues,' Development in Practice 1998
[3] (http://publications.oxfam.org.uk/oxfam/d
isplay.asp?K=002J0270&sf_20=oxfam_archiv
e_flag&st_20=NOT+Y&sf_01=CTITLE&st_01
=NGOs%2C+civil+society+and+state&sort=S
ORT_DATE%2FD&x=0&y=0&m=3&dc=3)
Zaleski, Pawel Stefan, Tocqueville on Civilian
Society: A Romantic Vision of the Dichotomic
Structure of Social Reality, Archiv für
Begriffsgeschichte Bd. 50/2008 [4] (https://w
eb.archive.org/web/20181009053108/http://
zaleski.wex.pl/2008%20tocqueville%20on%20
civilian%20society.pdf)
Helmut K. Anheier, Stefan Toepler,
International Encyclopedia of Civil Society,
Springer-Verlag New York Inc., New York
2010, ISBN 978-0-387-93996-4
External links
LSE Centre for Civil Wikiquote
has
Society (http://www.ls
quotations
e.ac.uk/collections/CC related to
Civil
S/) Archived (https://w
society.
eb.archive.org/web/20
100903150040/http://www.lse.ac.uk/col
lections/CCS/) 3 September 2010 at
the Wayback Machine
UN and Civil Society (https://www.un.or
g/en/civilsociety/index.shtml)
UNEP Global Civil Society Forum (http
s://web.archive.org/web/201603040639
43/http://www.unep.org/civil_society/gc
sf/) (archived 4 March 2016)
Global Environment Facility Civil Society
Network (http://www.gefcso.org/)
EU relations with Civil Society (https://w
eb.archive.org/web/20120202191522/ht
tp://ec.europa.eu/civil_society/index.ht
m) (archived 2 February 2012)
UK DFID relations with (https://web.archi
ve.org/web/20090416025518/http://ww
w.dfid.gov.uk/aboutdfid/DFIDwork/civils
ociety.asp) (archived 16 April 2009)
Civil Society (https://asesorianeo.com/s
ociedades-civiles/)
Civicus – Worldwide Alliance for Citizen
Participation (http://www.civicus.org)
Global civil society (PCDF) (http://www.p
cdf.org/civilsociety/default.htm) .
One World Trust Database of Civil
Society Self-regulatory Initiatives (http
s://web.archive.org/web/201601071359
35/http://www.oneworldtrust.org/csopr
oject/) (archived 7 January 2016)
Wiser.org – World Index for Social and
Environmental Responsibility (https://we
b.archive.org/web/20140411035152/htt
p://wiser.org/) – formerly
civilsociety.org (archived 11 April 2014)
Stakeholder Forum for a Sustainable
Future engagement in UN stakeholder
relations (https://web.archive.org/web/2
0130410001018/http://www.stakeholde
rforum.org/1index.php) (archived 10
April 2013)
International Society for Third-Sector
Research (http://www.istr.org) Archived
(https://web.archive.org/web/20180831
094235/https://www.istr.org/) 31
August 2018 at the Wayback Machine
Requier-Desjardins Mélanie & Bied-
Charreton Marc, 2007. Science and Civil
Society in the fight against
desertification. Les dossiers
thématiques du CSFD. Issue 6. 40 pp. (ht
tp://www.csf-desertification.eu/dossier/
item/science-and-civil-society-in-the-figh
t-against-desertification) Archived (http
s://web.archive.org/web/201404290520
52/http://www.csf-desertification.eu/do
ssier/item/science-and-civil-society-in-th
e-fight-against-desertification) 29 April
2014 at the Wayback Machine
100 years of trends in international civil
society (http://www.uia.be/node/16411
1) by the Union of International
Associations
Interface journal special issue (http://int
erfacejournal.nuim.ie/?p=1127) on civil
 society and social movements

Retrieved from
"https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?
title=Civil_society&oldid=1184052421"

This page was last edited on 8 November 2023, at

01:41 (UTC). •
Content is available under CC BY-SA 4.0 unless
otherwise noted.