Why More Civil Society Will Not Lead to Less Domination: Dealing with Present Day State Phobia through Michel Foucault and Neo-Republicanism

1Citations
Citations of this article
35Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

The notion of civil society, as an ontologically distinct sphere, separated from the state thereby serves as an antidote to the sovereign power of the state. Since the 1990s, we have seen reforms and organizational structures that advances the role of the market as well as the civil society along with a voluntary sector, often with the deliberate attempt to disrupt the power of the state and to tame the Leviathan through the promotion of networks, partnerships, co-governance and collaboration. This can be understood in terms of a present day state phobia and builds on a liberal conception of negative freedom understood as non-interference. Yet if we take Foucault‘s theorizations of power as omnipresent as it disrupts the power/freedom dichotomy we need to find alternative ways to cope with relations of power in order to not let them deteriorate into relations of domination. I argue in this article that neo-republican ideal of non-domination can be combined with Foucault’s insights on the nature of power. If correct, a continued promotion of more civil society involvement and partnerships between public and private actors provides a false insurance to diminish domination in contemporary societies.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Larsson, O. L. (2021). Why More Civil Society Will Not Lead to Less Domination: Dealing with Present Day State Phobia through Michel Foucault and Neo-Republicanism. Journal of Political Power, 14(1), 258–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/2158379X.2021.1889155

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free