Performing Agency in Shrinking Spaces: Acting Beyond the Resilience–Resistance Binary

IF 1.4 3区 社会学 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Social Inclusion Pub Date : 2023-05-08 DOI:10.17645/si.v11i2.6446
Soumita Banerjee
{"title":"Performing Agency in Shrinking Spaces: Acting Beyond the Resilience–Resistance Binary","authors":"Soumita Banerjee","doi":"10.17645/si.v11i2.6446","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Civil society occupies a significant space in any dynamic political landscape. However, in recent years, governments worldwide have attempted a shift away from activism and advocacy among civil society organisations (CSOs), favouring the apolitical service‐driven organisations while disabling those perceived as “political.” This process has incapacitated civil society of its political habits, tendencies, and potentials and turned CSOs into infinitely malleable and adaptive subjects, tamed and governed by institutions. Not only has this functioned to create a discursive expansion and valorisation of the concept of “civil society resilience” as an alternative political vision for “resistance,” but it has also led to the inclusion of CSOs in the political system on conditions of their exclusion from political participation. Using the case of India as an example of a shrinking welfare state—with its burgeoning poverty, repressed civic space, international non‐governmental organisations (INGOs) banned, and NGOs abrogated from foreign funding on “anti‐national,” “anti‐developmental” charges—this article captures the rapid symptomatic depoliticisation of civil society, its resource dependency on CSOs, and their potential political exclusion and disengagement. The research builds on a qualitative exploration of the transformative journey of ten highly‐influential INGOs in India to offer a distinct perspective toward effecting systemic change by repoliticising CSO resilience as an enhanced strategy of practicing resistance. In doing so, the article bridges the gap between the neoliberal manifestation of resilience and resistance by reconceptualising how and if CSOs co‐exist and navigate between competing visions of resilience (as institutionalised subjects of neoliberalism) and resistance (as political subjects of change).","PeriodicalId":37948,"journal":{"name":"Social Inclusion","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Inclusion","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v11i2.6446","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Civil society occupies a significant space in any dynamic political landscape. However, in recent years, governments worldwide have attempted a shift away from activism and advocacy among civil society organisations (CSOs), favouring the apolitical service‐driven organisations while disabling those perceived as “political.” This process has incapacitated civil society of its political habits, tendencies, and potentials and turned CSOs into infinitely malleable and adaptive subjects, tamed and governed by institutions. Not only has this functioned to create a discursive expansion and valorisation of the concept of “civil society resilience” as an alternative political vision for “resistance,” but it has also led to the inclusion of CSOs in the political system on conditions of their exclusion from political participation. Using the case of India as an example of a shrinking welfare state—with its burgeoning poverty, repressed civic space, international non‐governmental organisations (INGOs) banned, and NGOs abrogated from foreign funding on “anti‐national,” “anti‐developmental” charges—this article captures the rapid symptomatic depoliticisation of civil society, its resource dependency on CSOs, and their potential political exclusion and disengagement. The research builds on a qualitative exploration of the transformative journey of ten highly‐influential INGOs in India to offer a distinct perspective toward effecting systemic change by repoliticising CSO resilience as an enhanced strategy of practicing resistance. In doing so, the article bridges the gap between the neoliberal manifestation of resilience and resistance by reconceptualising how and if CSOs co‐exist and navigate between competing visions of resilience (as institutionalised subjects of neoliberalism) and resistance (as political subjects of change).
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
收缩空间中的表演代理:超越弹性-阻力二元
民间社会在任何动态的政治格局中都占有重要的空间。然而,近年来,世界各国政府都试图从民间社会组织(cso)的行动主义和倡导转变为支持非政治服务驱动的组织,而禁用那些被认为是“政治”的组织。这一过程使公民社会丧失了其政治习惯、倾向和潜力,使公民社会组织成为具有无限可塑性和适应性的主体,受到制度的驯服和统治。这不仅创造了“公民社会弹性”概念的话语扩展和价值,作为“抵抗”的另一种政治愿景,而且还导致公民社会组织在被排除在政治参与之外的条件下被纳入政治体系。本文以印度为例,将其作为福利国家萎缩的一个例子——其贫困迅速扩大,公民空间受到压制,国际非政府组织(ingo)被禁止,非政府组织因“反国家”、“反发展”的指控而被禁止获得外国资金——捕捉到公民社会的迅速非政治化症状,其对公民社会的资源依赖,以及他们潜在的政治排斥和脱离参与。该研究建立在对印度十个极具影响力的国际非政府组织变革之旅的定性探索的基础上,通过将公民社会组织的弹性重新政治化,作为一种增强的实践抵抗策略,为实现系统性变革提供了一个独特的视角。在此过程中,本文通过重新定义公民社会组织如何以及是否共存,并在弹性(作为新自由主义的制度化主体)和抵抗(作为变革的政治主体)的相互竞争的愿景之间导航,弥合了新自由主义的弹性和抵抗表现之间的差距。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Social Inclusion
Social Inclusion Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
114
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: Social Inclusion is a peer-reviewed open access journal, which provides academics and policy-makers with a forum to discuss and promote a more socially inclusive society. The journal encourages researchers to publish their results on topics concerning social and cultural cohesiveness, marginalized social groups, social stratification, minority-majority interaction, cultural diversity, national identity, and core-periphery relations, while making significant contributions to the understanding and enhancement of social inclusion worldwide. Social Inclusion aims at being an interdisciplinary journal, covering a broad range of topics, such as immigration, poverty, education, minorities, disability, discrimination, and inequality, with a special focus on studies which discuss solutions, strategies and models for social inclusion. Social Inclusion invites contributions from a broad range of disciplinary backgrounds and specializations, inter alia sociology, political science, international relations, history, cultural studies, geography, media studies, educational studies, communication science, and language studies. We welcome conceptual analysis, historical perspectives, and investigations based on empirical findings, while accepting regular research articles, review articles, commentaries, and reviews.
期刊最新文献
Disability, Religion, and Gender: Exploring Experiences of Exclusion in India Through an Intersectional Lens Intersecting Disability and Poverty in the Global South: Barriers to the Localization of the UNCRPD Disabled People and the Intersectional Nature of Social Inclusion Discourses of Digitalisation and the Positioning of Workers in Primary Care: A Norwegian Case Study Work‐Related ICT Use and the Dissolution of Boundaries Between Work and Private Life
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1