We want to create a network of writers to promote a large and growing body of international work on civil society.
We are interested in writing in academic, strategic, journalistic and activist forms, for diverse global audiences. Our aim is to enable the concept of civil society to become as familiar to general readers as the concepts of ‘democracy’ and ‘capitalism’, ‘market’ and ‘state’.
If you write on civil society, register your interest and share your work using the form below:
In local governments/ municipalities around the world, there are many innovations taking place that are devolving power to civil society. We want to identify and promote these innovations and transform the operations and functions of local governance.
We also want to hear from and network citizens around the world who are standing for election to public office in municipalities who have a commitment to empowering civil society.
If you are considering standing for public office in this area, we would like to hear from you. Our hope is that we can generate and share ideas and innovations for transforming local governance, develop teams of people committed to working together in in this area, in electoral activity, policy and innovation.
Indicate your interest by completing this form, and we will connect people with common interests.
Social enterprises are emerging in civil society around the world. In key sectors such banking and finance, renewable energy, telecommunications and health care, they remain localised in nature and are yet to eat into the market share of large corporates.
This project aims to explore options for global business collaboration for social enterprises in order to create significant global competitors to the dominant corporate players in the key sectors of:
banking and finance;
renewable energy; and
If you are interested in exploring these options, please indicate your interest using the form below. Outline the nature of your interest, and your background in the area. We will connect people with common interests.
A stronger civil society requires winding back both state and market intrusions into social life. This is a terrific outline of the issues on the market side of the equation.
Michael J. Sandel
What Money Can’t Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets
“The great missing debate in contemporary politics is about the role and reach of markets. Do we want a market economy, or a market society? What role should markets play in public life and personal relations? How can we decide which goods should be bought and sold, and which should be governed by nonmarket values? Where should money’s writ not run?
This is a debate we didn’t have during the era of market triumphalism. As a result, without quite realizing it—without ever deciding to do so—we drifted from having a market economy to being a market society.
The difference is this: A market economy is a tool—a valuable and effective tool—for organizing productive activity. A market society is a way of life in which market values seep into every aspect of human endeavor. It’s a place where social relations are made over in the image of the market.
The most fateful change that unfolded during the past three decades was not an increase in greed. It was the reach of markets, and of market values, into spheres of life traditionally governed by nonmarket norms. To contend with this condition, we need to do more than inveigh against greed; we need to have a public debate about where markets belong—and where they don’t.
Market values were coming to play a greater and greater role in social life. Economics was becoming an imperial domain. Today, the logic of buying and selling no longer applies to material goods alone. It increasingly governs the whole of life.
Even if you agree that we need to grapple with big questions about the morality of markets, you might doubt that our public discourse is up to the task. It’s a legitimate worry. At a time when political argument consists mainly of shouting matches on cable television, partisan vitriol on talk radio, and ideological food fights on the floor of Congress, it’s hard to imagine a reasoned public debate about such controversial moral questions as the right way to value procreation, children, education, health, the environment, citizenship, and other goods. I believe such a debate is possible, but only if we are willing to broaden the terms of our public discourse and grapple more explicitly with competing notions of the good life.
In hopes of avoiding sectarian strife, we often insist that citizens leave their moral and spiritual convictions behind when they enter the public square. But the reluctance to admit arguments about the good life into politics has had an unanticipated consequence. It has helped prepare the way for market triumphalism, and for the continuing hold of market reasoning.
This nonjudgmental stance toward values lies at the heart of market reasoning, and explains much of its appeal. But our reluctance to engage in moral and spiritual argument, together with our embrace of markets, has exacted a heavy price: it has drained public discourse of moral and civic energy, and contributed to the technocratic, managerial politics afflicting many societies today.”
Michael J. Sandel, a political philosopher at Harvard, is the author of What Money Can’t Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets, from which this article is adapted.