Societal spheres in the light of history A division of society into statecraft, economy, and civil society is found in Plato's Republic. Its theoretical base is the differentiated and sometimes contradictory norms for these spheres. The mainstream of European structuration is traced from the 'two swords' - state and church - that structured western European society in the Middle Ages to the six societal spheres (or cardinal institutions) of society - the economy, government, science, religion, ethics, and art - that are visible today. Each maintain a large measure of independence (Weber's Eigengesetzlichkeit). Each is dependent on a special type of freedom: civic liberties, free trade, academic freedom, religious toleration, the right to follow one's conscience, artistic license. The paper pauses in this differentiation process at special junctures: the English revolution, the emergence of the Latin American and North American societies, the evolution of modem society as an underpinning of democracy, the emergence of the European Union, and the post-Communist Central and Eastern Europe. ; Sociologisk Forsknings digitala arkiv
This dissertation studies the development of the environmental issue from a discursive perspective. Through an analysis of views on nature and the environment in several NGOs and main political organs, the dissertation tries to explain how a certain view became hegemonic. The analysis pertains to the period between the publication of Silent Spring in 1962 and the introduction of the concept sustainable development by the UN in 1987. From a realistic starting point and with critical discourse analysis (CDA) as its method, the dissertation aims to identify causal powers and mechanisms that have generated and institutionalized the environmental discourse. An analytical model is developed and applied on three levels; a sociolinguistic, institutional, and macrosocial level; which also reflect the methodological progression of the study from description to explanation. The result shows that the discursive practice was hegemonized by a Western view promoting economic growth. This discourse gradually gained ground at the expense of an anti-systemic discourse which posited structural societal changes as the answer to environmental problems. Mechanisms such as the exclusion of some views and actors from common discursive practices were crucial for the process of homogenizing the discourse and developing consensus. Through incorporating that part of the environmental movement which did not fight the dominant economic and political system, the UN turned it into support for its own project, which is part of the process of hegemony. At the same time the environmental objectives of the hegemonic discourse were established in the institutional spheres. The institutionalization of the environmental issue changed the focus from social critique to a question of development and technology, something which helped displace the original critical and partially anti-systemic character of environmental discourse. Through turning the critical and negative account of the situation into a more harmonious and hopeful vision, for instance in terms of sustainable development, a foundation was laid for the later development of ecological modernization. When the hegemonic discourse invested the concept of sustainable development with emphases on progress and economic growth, it encapsulated the environmental issue within the framework of the prevailing social system. ; With summary in English and Spanish/Con resumen en inglés y en español
Abstract Olsson, Karin (2009). Den (över)levande demokratin. En idékritisk analys av demokratins reproducerbarhet i Robert Dahls tänkta värld. (Sustainable Democracy. Exploring the Idea of a Reproducible Democracy in the Theory of Robert A. Dahl). Acta Wexionensia 185/2009, ISSN: 1404-4307, ISBN: 978-91-7636-677-6. With a summary in English. Everybody loves democracy. The problem is that while everybody calls himself democratic, the ideal form of democracy is hard to come by in the real world. But if we believe in democracy and believe that it is the best form of government, I argue that we should try to design a theory of democracy that is realisable – and reproducible. This thesis, then, focuses primarily on the question whether we find support in democratic theory for an idea of a self-reproducing democracy. It proceeds by means of an investigation of Robert A. Dahl's theory of democracy. He is one of the most well-known and highly regarded theorists in the field of democratic research, whose work covers both normative and empirical analysis. When analysing the reproducible democracy, I argue that it is essential to study both normative values and empirical assumptions: the values that count as intrinsic to democracy, the assumptions that are made about man, and the institutions that are needed for the realisable and reproducible democracy. In modern social science man is often pushed into the background. This is also the case in theories of democracy, even though man (the individual) is the one who has the right to vote, the one who has the autonomy to decide – the one who has to act democratically in order to preserve democracy. The study yields the following findings. First, in Dahl's theory political equality and autonomy come out as intrinsic values. Second, the assumptions made about man show that even if he seems to be ignored, he is always present. When Dahl construes his theory, he does it with full attention to man's qualities, interests, manners of acting and reacting, and adaptability to the values of democracy. Third, the institutions needed to realise and reproduce democracy go further than the institutions of polyarchy. They need support from the judicial system, political culture, education and the market. Fourth, when it comes down to making democracy work and reproducing democracy, Dahl puts the full responsibility on man as he is not willing to allow too rigid constitutional mechanisms. Fifth, even though Dahl puts the emphasis on the empirical situation of the real world, he does not alter his normative ideals in order to make the theory more adaptive. For him, political equality and autonomy are imperative demands, too important to alter. And the only way to get full procedural democracy is to trust the democratic man.
