There are two contrasting perspectives on what has come to be known as civil society, a divergence that goes beyond merely defining the term. This, perhaps, is characteristic of many terms—whether political, intellectual, or philosophical. However, the disparity here applies to the stance toward civil society and its role in addressing capitalist values.
This divergence stems either from the class, intellectual, or ideological differences among proponents of various views or from the differing vantage points of those evaluating the efficacy of civil society. Furthermore, it reflects their assessment of the relationship between civil society and the state and its institutions. This ongoing debate continually raises the question of the importance of civil society in fulfilling the aspirations of societies subject to the encroachment of dominant values that serve only the interests of ruling elites and their allies.
Civil Society and Capitalism
To explore these two perspectives, we can begin by shedding light on the socialist school of thought, which—as is often the case due to its diverse strands—has split into two main camps regarding its evaluation of civil society:
- The First Perspective
Some Marxists view the concept of civil society as a bourgeois construct that obscures class struggle and nullifies the role of communist parties in achieving socialism. According to this perspective, civil society is nothing more than bourgeois society governed by the market economy. In this framework, citizenship in the bourgeois political project assumes equality, which is never truly realized. Under such circumstances, the citizen is subjected to exploitation and severe class disparity, with civil society serving as a tool to benefit the bourgeoisie. It acts as a political game that shields the state from social unrest and serves the interests of the bourgeoisie, even if participants in this game believe themselves removed from capitalist authority. This led Marx to conclude that civil society is a mere illusion of capitalism.
This dismissive view of civil society is not exclusive to Marxists; it is also embraced by radicals from various political and ideological schools, including armed groups and organizations. Although their reasons for rejection may differ, a common thread among them is the desire for intellectual distinction to support organizational differentiation.
- The Second Perspective
This view also draws on Marx's early writings, influenced by Hegel, who referred to civil society as the "basic classes." Some socialists and many civil society activists adopt this view, seeing civil society institutions as essential tools for advancing social work rooted in human values. They consider civil society a fundamental partner in building a just and democratic society.
Proponents of this perspective, including non-leftists, argue that despite the rhetoric of class struggle, the conflict as envisioned by Marx in his theory of “historical determinism”—between the working class and the bourgeoisie—did not unfold. The capitalist system did not collapse as predicted, nor did the working class and its allies (the peasants) take power to build a communist society. Reality has confirmed that it is impossible to develop an economy with an unskilled workforce lacking knowledge of technologies that have begun to evolve and transform industry into a science rather than relying on physical strength. This indicates significant development witnessed by capitalist states, which have come to realize the importance of civil society in activating economic, social, and political fields. Thus, civil society has become the third pillar in a partnership aimed at fostering balanced and integrated social relationships.
A Historical Testimony
To arrive at a positive conclusion, we must briefly revisit the realistic definition of civil society and examine whether its institutions have proven effective in countering the excesses of capitalism or, as radicals suggest, merely serve as bourgeois tools.
As previously mentioned, there is disagreement among both political actors and philosophers about defining civil society. However, it can be broadly described as referring to "non-governmental and non-profit organizations that operate independently of the government and the private sector, aiming to achieve public welfare, promote democracy, human rights, social justice, sustainable development, and address various social and environmental issues." This implies specific criteria regarding the nature of civil society institutions and their roles, with deviations from these criteria considered violations of the concept.
In this light, civil society has played a genuine and pivotal role over the decades of the 19th and 20th centuries in confronting capitalist excesses. Its institutions made numerous sacrifices that contributed, directly or indirectly, to the reforms that capitalism underwent, culminating in what came to be known as the "welfare state." This state sought to enhance and safeguard the economic and social welfare of citizens based on principles of equal opportunity, equitable wealth distribution, and public responsibility for vulnerable citizens. It also included government funding for healthcare, education, and other public services.
Examples of civil society's role in achieving the welfare state include:
- The British labor movement in the 19th century, which called for improving workers' conditions, eventually leading to labor laws.
- The women's movements in Britain and America, which fought for voting rights.
- The labor strikes in 20th-century France, which pushed for better wages, working conditions, and reforms in labor laws and social welfare.
- The civil rights movement in America, which combated racial discrimination and worked toward equality.
While these efforts did not eliminate capitalism's dominance in many countries, they significantly curbed its excesses. This prompted capitalist systems, particularly in their countries of origin, to adopt reform measures that have allowed them to survive to this day.
The Desired Role
Regardless of the ideological positions of capitalism and socialism concerning civil society—whether it is viewed as a bourgeois tool or not—both the history and reality of civil society confirm its effectiveness in expressing the struggles of peoples. It provides a platform for diverse social classes to achieve collective rights. The alternative, however, is limited to two options: retreating into passivity and surrendering to the dominance of elites—whatever their nature—or adopting a radical, confrontational approach characterized by immense sacrifices and unpredictable consequences.
Therefore, if we are serious about confronting the encroachment of capitalism—especially in our countries, most of which are classified as "peripheral"—it is essential to activate civil society to fulfill its designated role. This involves exerting public pressure in various forms, whether political, protest-based, media-driven, or interactive. It also requires raising awareness through all available means to warn against and mitigate the impacts and dangers of capitalism on societies, the environment, and value systems. Additionally, it necessitates pushing for the adoption of policies that uphold social justice, protect the environment, and promote solidarity among affected groups.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Read this Article in Arabic
