Mediating Structures: Their Organization in Civil Society

This paper explores a counter-weight to anti-democratic trends suggested by civil society theory: mediating structures (also known as ‘intermediate’ or ‘intermediary’ organizations). We look briefly at the range of ways in which the concept has been used in social science and then focus on literature which employs the concept specifically in the context of debates about sustainable democracy We discern from the theoretical literature four distinct functions said to be performed in democracies by mediating structures and we offer case examples of organizations which perform those functions in the contemporary real world. We conclude by providing pointers to how mediating structures might be identified, supported and sustained in the face of anti-democratic trends today.

Once More about the Concept of Civil Society: A Philosophical Approach

There is a huge number of publications devoted to civil society. Nevertheless this theme is inexhaustible, because the very subject of it is multidimensional and changing along with the evolution of society. Alongside this, one of the key problems of the civil society theory is a problem of its perception in our mind. Answering these questions, the author, at first, stresses the necessity to differ three historical types of civil society: ancient classical polis, civil communities of the Modern History and contemporary civil society. They all are substantially different inter se from the axiological point of view. That is a reason not to use the ideological and methodological curves developed for historically previous types of civil society for the analysis of contemporary one. Secondly, the author focuses attention upon epistemological aspect of the civil society theory, in particular he proposes to rethink the concept of “totality” not in a formal logic way but in the “logic” of living systems in order to be able by means of this concept to express the unity of the diversity of social system. Thirdly, the author treats the concept of “citizen” in informal sense, stresses its existential, personal content and contemplates it through the dialectical relation of “totality-peculiarity-individuality.” Fourthly, the author researches the phenomenon of contemporary civil society as a counterpart of a state in the complex society the main features of which are the diversity and individuality. He comes to the conclusion that the civil society is not a society in common sense, but rather is some kind of “soil structure,” so called “social mycelium” that fertilizes social system with new opportunities. In the final part of the article author gives the example of one of the approaches to estimate the degree of maturation of civil society, proposed by the world-wide international organization “Civicus.” He stresses that the logic of power distribution in contemporary society presupposes cooperation of different actors, and one of the most influential of them is the civil society.

Support and Control: The Biaxial Relationship between Government and Social Organizations

In an era with rapidly developing social organizations, the policies and strategies made by the government and its role in social organizations have been the focus of research. Indeed, extraneous civil society theory and corporatism theory have certain explanatory power. However, these two theories do not quite conform to the national situation of China. Based on this background, this paper is conducted with a focus on administration of social organizations by the government. With an analysis of both theory and current status, this paper breaks through the traditional uniaxial relationship and puts forward that the relationship between the government and social organizations is actually biaxial. That is to say, the effect of the government is indispensable and its two roles of support and control on social organizations are separated. On this basis, we further expound the model of support and control in the biaxial relationship.