Relationship between Civil Society and the State

Two antithetical trends in political theory have tended to obfuscate the relationship between state
and civil society. One recurring trend has located the state at the central point of things. The
state-oriented concept from the days of classical political thought has accorded extraordinary
importance to state as a unique sort of institutional arrangement that enables the realization of
good life and development of potentialities of individuals in society. The second trend, in
contrast, seeks to descend the state in the background and initiate the rule of uncontrolled market
for the promotion of individual enterprise, unfettered competition and preeminence of private
property. The neo-liberal scheme of rolling back the state and allowing market supremacy has
meant conferring privileges to the civil society the opposite of state-centric view.
State as the controller and restrictive guardian of society seeks to fix the scope of political
practice. Civil society on the other hand obviates as the region occupied by the rights-possessing
or holding and juridical defined individuals, rightly called citizens. Political participation,
holding the state accountable for its action and open publicity of politics are the hallmarks of
civil society. To quote Chandhoke, the essential component of politics is dialogues and
contestations with the state. Hence, civil society becomes the site for the production of a critical
rational discourse which possesses the potential to interrogate the state. In simple terms, the
site at which society enters into a relationship with the state can be defined as civil society.
Open communication and publicity, freedom of speech and expressions and the right to form
associations, being the characteristics of civil society, it occupies a prideful place in democratic
theory. The nature of the state, whether democratic or totalitarian, can be understood only by
referring to the politics of civil society. In addition, civil societys influencing property (as
distinguished from control function) is dependent on its democratic character. Democratic theory
has acknowledged the pre eminence of civil society as an essential prerequisite for the existence
of democracy. Following Chandhokes admirable clarificatory explanation, it can now be
presented as the gist of the nature of the state can be interpreted by referring to the politics of
civil society. The two are united by a bond of give and take policy, there can be no theory of the
state without a theory of civil society, and correspondingly, there can be no theory of civil society
without a theory of the state. State-Civil Society Relationship: An Evolutionary Perspective The
historical study of political philosophy is in reality the history of state-civil society relationship,
as explained by noteworthy political thinkers. Before proceeding to discuss the contributions of
seminal political theorists, a brief overview of the progress of thought is presented here for
general understanding. The term civil society can be traced to ancient Greek political thought
and to the works Cicero and other Romans. But, in classical usage civil society was equated with
state. In its modern form, civil society emerged in the Scottish and continental Enlightenment of
the 18th century. Numerous political analysts like Thomas Paine, Hegel, visualized the civil
society as a domain running parallel to but separate from the state. They idealized it as a realm
where citizens associate according to their own interests and pursuits. The novel mode of
thinking was perhaps the reflection of new economic realities characterized or marked by the rise
of private property, market competition and the bourgeoisie. There was also a growing popular
demand for liberty as manifested in the American and French Revolutions.
The idea of civil society suffered an eclipse in the mid-nineteenth century as a result of the
attracting of considerable part of attention by the social and political consequences of the
industrial revolution. The idea of civil society was resurrected by Antonio Gramsci after the end
of Second World War who connoted civil society as a special nucleus of independent political

activity, a sphere of struggle against tyranny. Communist states in erstwhile USSR and Eastern
Europe over extended authority over nearly all fields of social life. The collapse of the
communist countries led to the questioning of the spheres of state control. In fact the Czech,
Hungarian and Polish activists propagated the slogan of civil society that they considered the
state tended to encroach; hence, the desire was to encourage the flourishing of the institutions of
civil society (e.g. Church) outside the legal institution of the state
The fall of the Soviet system and the Eastern Bloc liberated unprecedented movements and
agitations for and towards democracy throughout the world. Civil society idealized in term of
associative initiatives of non-state organizations appeared as a cherishable social arena both in
the post communist ruling situations and in the developed west where capitalist atomization had
steadily become undesirable. Public frustration and disappear with conventional party system
catalyzed interest in civil society, and the new social campaigns (i.e. Feminism, ecological
activism) offered opportunities for civil society initiatives independent of the state.