我们需要谈谈政治社会:东欧和欧亚大陆超越公民社会的下层抵抗

IF 1.1 3区 社会学 Q2 AREA STUDIES
L. Rekhviashvili
{"title":"我们需要谈谈政治社会:东欧和欧亚大陆超越公民社会的下层抵抗","authors":"L. Rekhviashvili","doi":"10.1080/02634937.2022.2113033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article points out the need to talk about the political society, or the politics and resistances, of subaltern groups in Eastern Europe and Eurasia. Existing literature frames diversity marginalized struggles as civil society struggles or decries the weakness of donor-driven, disembedded civil societies, reproducing the understanding of political life in the region in terms of absences, voids and deficiencies. Challenging this subsumption or dismissal of subaltern struggles, I advance two arguments. First, I argue against broadening the civil society concept to include various subaltern struggles as this approach risks overwriting differences between those groups that mobilize as rights-bearing citizens and the ones that are not recognized or treated as civil society. Instead, I propose acknowledging the historically and spatially contingent character of civil society and the defining role of the state and other actors in shaping which struggles fall within or beyond institutional and discursive frameworks of legality and legitimacy. Second, I argue that Patra Chatterjee’s concept of ‘political society’ can serve better as a meta-vocabulary to account for a diversity of struggles shunted as backwards, premodern and uncivilized, and to refocus research from what is absent to what is present, towards understanding counter-hegemonic discourses and practices.","PeriodicalId":46602,"journal":{"name":"Central Asian Survey","volume":"42 1","pages":"219 - 237"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"We need to talk about political society: subaltern resistances beyond civil society in Eastern Europe and Eurasia\",\"authors\":\"L. Rekhviashvili\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02634937.2022.2113033\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This article points out the need to talk about the political society, or the politics and resistances, of subaltern groups in Eastern Europe and Eurasia. Existing literature frames diversity marginalized struggles as civil society struggles or decries the weakness of donor-driven, disembedded civil societies, reproducing the understanding of political life in the region in terms of absences, voids and deficiencies. Challenging this subsumption or dismissal of subaltern struggles, I advance two arguments. First, I argue against broadening the civil society concept to include various subaltern struggles as this approach risks overwriting differences between those groups that mobilize as rights-bearing citizens and the ones that are not recognized or treated as civil society. Instead, I propose acknowledging the historically and spatially contingent character of civil society and the defining role of the state and other actors in shaping which struggles fall within or beyond institutional and discursive frameworks of legality and legitimacy. Second, I argue that Patra Chatterjee’s concept of ‘political society’ can serve better as a meta-vocabulary to account for a diversity of struggles shunted as backwards, premodern and uncivilized, and to refocus research from what is absent to what is present, towards understanding counter-hegemonic discourses and practices.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46602,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Central Asian Survey\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"219 - 237\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Central Asian Survey\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02634937.2022.2113033\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"AREA STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Central Asian Survey","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02634937.2022.2113033","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文指出,有必要谈谈东欧和欧亚大陆下层群体的政治社会,或政治和抵抗。现有文献将多样性边缘化的斗争定义为民间社会的斗争,或谴责捐助者驱动的、被孤立的民间社会的软弱,再现了对该地区政治生活的缺席、空洞和不足的理解。对于这种对下级斗争的包容或驳回,我提出了两个论点。首先,我反对将民间社会的概念扩大到包括各种次级斗争,因为这种方法有可能掩盖那些作为有权利的公民动员起来的群体与那些不被承认或视为民间社会的群体之间的差异。相反,我建议承认民间社会的历史和空间偶然性,以及国家和其他行为者在塑造哪些斗争属于或超出合法性和合法性的制度和话语框架方面的决定性作用。其次,我认为Patra Chatterjee的“政治社会”概念可以更好地作为一个元词汇来解释被视为倒退、前现代和未文明的斗争的多样性,并将研究从不存在的东西重新集中到存在的东西,以理解反霸权的话语和实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
We need to talk about political society: subaltern resistances beyond civil society in Eastern Europe and Eurasia
ABSTRACT This article points out the need to talk about the political society, or the politics and resistances, of subaltern groups in Eastern Europe and Eurasia. Existing literature frames diversity marginalized struggles as civil society struggles or decries the weakness of donor-driven, disembedded civil societies, reproducing the understanding of political life in the region in terms of absences, voids and deficiencies. Challenging this subsumption or dismissal of subaltern struggles, I advance two arguments. First, I argue against broadening the civil society concept to include various subaltern struggles as this approach risks overwriting differences between those groups that mobilize as rights-bearing citizens and the ones that are not recognized or treated as civil society. Instead, I propose acknowledging the historically and spatially contingent character of civil society and the defining role of the state and other actors in shaping which struggles fall within or beyond institutional and discursive frameworks of legality and legitimacy. Second, I argue that Patra Chatterjee’s concept of ‘political society’ can serve better as a meta-vocabulary to account for a diversity of struggles shunted as backwards, premodern and uncivilized, and to refocus research from what is absent to what is present, towards understanding counter-hegemonic discourses and practices.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Central Asian Survey
Central Asian Survey AREA STUDIES-
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
33.30%
发文量
45
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信