Abstract
Civil society is a remedy for the alienation that has been spawned by the market. Because the market has been differentiated categorically from civil society, the intersubjective origin of this economic regulator has been seriously distorted. Hence returning organizations to their base in civil society can have a very positive impact on the development of citizens. For example, when order is established on this foundation, persons have intimate knowledge of one another, build their relationships on interpersonally validated trust, and generate solidarity through their regular intervention into public space. As a result, associations that are grounded in civil society provide persons with a terrific sense of security. Constant engagement that encourages persons to defend one another is essential to the creation and preservation of an open and free society. This intervention is a virtue, rather than a nuisance. Consumers are crippled in this respect, and thus are incapable of achieving any security. There are no lasting relationships at the marketplace, but instead tenuous friendships that may have to be sacrificed at any moment to the demands of the so-called bottom line. Citizenship, on the other hand, cannot be this ephemeral. Therefore, democracy is in serious trouble in modern societies, if the citizen is replaced by the consumer. For without trust, mutual defense, and collective responsibility, a society is condemned to devolve into a morass of accusations, suspicions, and insecurities. None will assume that there is any benefit to engaging others in a long-term, collective project. Why, therefore, should society exist at all?
Highlights
During the past twenty years life has changed dramatically in the United States and the rest of the world
The philosophy of Keynes is in decline, while neoliberalism has become the centerpiece of most discussions about the economic life
In order for the economy to retain a sense of equilibrium, systematic and regular interventions are needed
Summary
Keyneso idëjas keièia Friedricho von Hayeko koncepcija, teigianti, kad kolektyvinis pradas yra mitas, o socialinë tvarka formuojasi spontaniðkai rinkos sàveikø aplikose. Kolektyvinë atsakomybë yra ne tik beprasmis dalykas, bet ir esminis ekonomikos stabdis. Atsisakoma minties (kaip pasenusios ideologijos), kad þmonës yra esmingai tarp savæs susijæ ir turi bendrus interesus. Svarbiausias dalykas tas, kad asmenys vaizduojami kaip pilieèiai, kurie susijæ su kaimynais ir platesne visuomene. Kad asmenys, kurie yra socializuoti kaip vartotojai, raginami gana sparèiai tapti pilieèiais. Kad visuomenë esti tik netiesiogiai – geriausiu atveju – susijæ atomai. Kadangi socialinë aplinka nëra laisvai pasirenkama ir iðorinë (kaip, sakykim, rinkos – nematomos rankos atveju), svarbu tai, kaip asmenys ávertina savo veiksmø poveiká kitiems asmenims. Pilietinë visuomenë yra galimybë iðvengti susvetimëjimo, kurá diegia rinka. Taigi pakartotinai verta kelti esminá sociologijos klausimà: kaip ir kodël egzistuoja visuomenë?
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
