Civil society occupies a significant space in any dynamic political landscape. However, in recent years, governments worldwide have attempted a shift away from activism and advocacy among civil society organisations (CSOs), favouring the apolitical service‐driven organisations while disabling those perceived as “political.” This process has incapacitated civil society of its political habits, tendencies, and potentials and turned CSOs into infinitely malleable and adaptive subjects, tamed and governed by institutions. Not only has this functioned to create a discursive expansion and valorisation of the concept of “civil society resilience” as an alternative political vision for “resistance,” but it has also led to the inclusion of CSOs in the political system on conditions of their exclusion from political participation. Using the case of India as an example of a shrinking welfare state—with its burgeoning poverty, repressed civic space, international non‐governmental organisations (INGOs) banned, and NGOs abrogated from foreign funding on “anti‐national,” “anti‐developmental” charges—this article captures the rapid symptomatic depoliticisation of civil society, its resource dependency on CSOs, and their potential political exclusion and disengagement. The research builds on a qualitative exploration of the transformative journey of ten highly‐influential INGOs in India to offer a distinct perspective toward effecting systemic change by repoliticising CSO resilience as an enhanced strategy of practicing resistance. In doing so, the article bridges the gap between the neoliberal manifestation of resilience and resistance by reconceptualising how and if CSOs co‐exist and navigate between competing visions of resilience (as institutionalised subjects of neoliberalism) and resistance (as political subjects of change).
The world has undergone a change from ancient to modern. The enthusiasm among people to discover the undiscovered actually marked the beginning of the modern era and the advent of globalisation can be viewed as a bi-product of this modern civilisation. Globalisation was apparently meant to enhance cooperation among nations as partners in trade, but, gradually with better exposure to each other's culture, people started embracing the global ideas, habits, and way of life. Globalisation is therefore not just the integration of economies and markets, but it is also the integration of cultures and understandings, making people aware of their rights and role to be played in transforming the society for better. Thus, globalisation can rightly be called as the source of modern human rights, as it has no doubt played an active role in preserving and protecting Human Rights by technological expansion, increasing neo-liberal values, establishing certain super-national institutions and by promoting and maintaining civil liberties that uphold freedom, transparency, and popular participation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.