Armine Ishkanian

The backlash against civil society in the wake of the Long War on Terror

The enthusiasm for civil society that emerged in the late 1980s and 1990s with the collapse of the Berlin Wall and the spread of democratic regimes has been replaced in recent years by a backlash against civil society on many levels and fronts. This has particularly intensified since the attacks of 11 September 2001 and the ensuing global war on terror. This article examines the causes of this backlash within the context of the ‘Long War on Terror’, describes the overt and implicit manifestations of the backlash, and reflects upon the implications for the future. It considers how the growing prominence of concerns about security and the concomitant expansion of counter-terrorist measures across the world threaten the spaces for civil society to flourish and act. It argues that while the manifestations of the backlash, such as the crackdown on NGOs in Russia and the taming of NGOs by bilateral and multilateral agencies, may appear to be disparate, unconnected phenomena, on closer inspection it is clear that they are intricately intertwined.

Neoliberalism and Violence: The Big Society and the Changing Politics of Domestic Violence in England

Focusing on the domestic violence sector as a case study, this article examines how the Big Society agenda, coming alongside public spending cuts, is affecting the independence and ability of women’s organizations to engage in progressive policy shaping. By situating the analysis of the Big Society agenda within the broader context of international civil society strengthening programmes, the article considers how the processes currently unfolding in England, share certain similarities to what has happened globally wherever neoliberal policies aimed at instrumentalizing civil society for service delivery have been implemented. It contends that the policies of the Big Society agenda, which are aimed at strengthening the ‘capacity’ of civil society, are instead creating a situation where the independence and ability of civil society organizations to engage in progressive policy making is weakened.

Introduction: What is Big Society? Contemporary Social Policy in a Historical and Comparative Perspective

There can be no sensible commentary or meaningful debate about Big Society without full recognition that it ‘is a deeply historical concept’, to cite Matthew Hilton’s opening sentence in his chapter below. The aim of this volume is to create a dialogue between history, policy and practice, and to provide readers with a historically grounded, internationally informed, multidisciplinary answer to the question we pose in the title – The Big Society Debate: A New Agenda for Social Welfare? The idea for the volume came about following a one-day workshop held in March 2011 at the London School of Economics titled ‘Thinking Critically about the Big Society’. The workshop brought together academics from different disciplines, practitioners from the voluntary and public sectors, and historians from the History and Policy network to discuss the underpinnings of the ‘Big Society’ agenda, the historical context from which this idea emerged, the effects of the Big Society in practice, its implications longer term for civil society, relations between state and non-state actors, and what lessons can be drawn from international experience. This volume continues that discussion and begins with the historical. The chapters in Part I provide the archivally researched contributions of professional historians, which are vital to critically inform and complement the chapters in Part II that focus on social policy and examine the challenges of operationalising the three key components of the Big Society agenda as defined by the Cabinet Office: community empowerment; opening up public services; and social action (Office for Civil Society, 2011a). Various chapters in this volume raise questions and problematise these stated aims. They examine the limitations and consider the challenges involved in translating these ideas into practice.

What does democracy mean? Activist views and practices in Athens, Cairo, London and Moscow

We shed light on the discontent with and the appeal of democracy by interviewing some of the most committed critical citizens: core activists in street protests. Based on interviews in Athens, Cairo, London, and Moscow, we found that they rejected representative democracy as insufficient, and believed democracy to entail having a voice and a responsibility to participate intensively in political decision-making. Activists saw themselves as engaged in prefigurative politics by fostering democratic practices within the movement and, ultimately, in society, but also raised concerns about internal power dynamics reproducing existing inequalities and exclusions. The insistence by activists that citizens have both a right and a duty to participate should be taken more seriously by political scientists and policymakers, not just as a threat to democracy and democratization, but as an opportunity. However, contemporary social movements are not straightforward sites of prefiguration, but sites of struggle between experimental and traditional forms of organizing, between inclusive aspirations and exclusive tendencies.

Self-Determined Citizens? New Forms of Civic Activism and Citizenship in Armenia

This article examines the recent emergence and growth of grassroots social movements in Armenia which are locally known as ‘civic initiatives’. It considers what their emergence tells us about the development of civil society and the changing understandings and practices of citizenship in Armenia in the post-Soviet period. It analyses why civic initiatives explicitly reject and distance themselves from formal, professionalised NGOs and what new models of civic activism and citizenship they have introduced. It argues that civic initiatives embrace a more political understanding of civil society than that which was introduced by Western donors in the 1990s.

From Consensus to Dissensus: The Politics of Anti-austerity Activism in London and Its Relationship to Voluntary Organizations

ABSTRACT This article examines how activism against austerity is organized and manifested in London. Given that anti-austerity activists are addressing issues related to social welfare, we examine whether there are alliances between the activists and voluntary organizations (VOs) that are working in that field. Examining the challenges involved in creating and sustaining alliances, we argue that the regulatory context alone is an insufficient explanation as to why activist–VO alliances are difficult to establish and maintain. We contend that more significantly, it is VOs’ and activists’ divergent and at times irreconcilable stances, which we refer to as the consensus and dissensus stances, respectively, which impede activist–VO alliances, beyond episodic interactions, from developing.

Resisting neoliberalism? Movements against austerity and for democracy in Cairo, Athens and London:

Drawing on interviews conducted with activists from Athens, Cairo and London in 2013, we examine activists’ understandings of, critiques of and concerns around neoliberal policies. We demonstrate that activists often imply, and sometimes explicitly formulate, a fundamental incompatibility between the current economic system and their conceptions of democracy, but also that ‘anti-neoliberal’ is a very inadequate label for describing their political positions and practices. We demonstrate how activists developed deeply interlinked critiques of both the political system and the economic policies that emanated from it. We maintain that at least as important as their discourses were their practices. We analyse how solidarity and self-help practices were perceived as political interventions, rather than acts of charity, through which activists confronted the state with its failure to provide basic services.

The square and beyond: trajectories and implications of the square occupations

From 2010, the world has witnessed a wave of “square occupations”: from the anti-austerity protests in Southern Europe, to the Arab uprisings, to the global Occupy movement. Based on interviews with core activists in Athens, Cairo, London, and Moscow, our research in this chapter shows that the experience of mobilizing or camping in the squares has inspired people to become more active in their neighborhoods and communities in subsequent months and years. The square occupations introduced new ideas and opened new public debates about the economy, systems of governance and democracy, as well as the role of the state and citizens. However, as the movements keep coming up against unresponsive and increasingly repressive state structures, increasing clashes both with those state structures and between progressive and nativist populist movements are to be expected.

Challenging the Gospel of Neoliberalism? Civil Society Opposition to Mining in Armenia

Abstract This paper examines the introduction of neoliberal policies in the mining sector in Armenia and the civil society opposition to those policies and practices. While recognizing that neoliberal policies have global reach, the paper examines how neoliberal policies are locally translated, manifested, and resisted in Armenia and analyzes the factors that shape resistance to neoliberal policies. It argues that the anti-mining activists have created new subjectivities and spaces for activism where they resist and challenge neoliberal policies and practices in the mining sector as well as the heretofore accepted formal practices of civil society advocacy and engagement in policy processes. Although the anti-mining activists have not changed the way mining is practiced in Armenia, they have opened up debates around mining, and neoliberal policies more generally, and created new understandings and practices of civic activism and social mobilization in Armenia.

Book Review: Linda Milbourne Voluntary Sector in Transition: Hard Times or New Opportunities?

Linda Milbourne Voluntary Sector in Transition: Hard Times or New Opportunities?, Bristol: Policy Press, 2013. 224 pp. £70 (hbk). ISBN 9781847427236 This book by Linda Milbourne is a theoretically informed and empirically rich study of how recent political and policy developments in England have affected the voluntary sector and how voluntary sector organisations (VSOs) are responding, adapting and in some instances, resisting these developments. Whilst it is primarily based on research conducted during the time of New Labour, Milbourne also examines continuities and changes in the policy landscape that have occurred under the Coalition government since 2010. The author illustrates, in great detail, how the policy landscape is changing and examines the challenges faced by VSOs on a number of fronts including the substantial reduction in funding; growing privatisation of public services and contracting; and the continuing dominance and growth of a culture of managerialism with its emphasis on ‘performance management’. Milbourne draws on extensive field research conducted in England to demonstrate how VSOs are coming under increased pressure to show impact by providing measurable evidence of outcomes and to demonstrate efficiency.