The Contemporary Significance of Gramsci's Critique of Civil Society

n the era of neoliberal capitalist globalization, two contradictory discoursesare clearly noticeable in civil society movement. On the one hand, devotedright-wing followers in civil society offer a militant view of the state and arguethat it must be challenged on the grounds of transparency, accountability, down-sizing, and so on. Such a view was long ago articulated by Locke. According tothis view, civil society is the bearer of rights and could be a source of resistance to the state, in case the state violates human rights. This view, as also Locke's view, does not seek to problematize civil society. On the contrary, civil society, in this view, is the principle organizer of human life. Such a view is usually foundin contemporary neoliberal critiques of the state today. On the other hand, various sections of the Left-using a productivist model of politics or a feminist model or environmentalism-wonder how civil society could be seen a source of resistance to state power because civil society legitimizes capitalism and the coercive state power. Both these pro-civil society stances and anti-civil society stances form a dichotomy in the era of capitalist globalization today. Aspects of the earlier dichotomy were perceived for the first time by Gramsci during the interwar period, while some other positions are a product of the contemporary era. For various reasons, as we shall see, Gramsci's original position on the subject is little known. However, Gramsci modifies both pro-civil society stances of liberalism (originally Locke's) and anti-civil society stances of the Left (originally Marx's). It is pertinent to recollect certain original positions communicated on these issues by Gramsci long ago. This article proposes certain middle grounds that have been recovered from Gramsci as a way out of the puzzle that emerges from this dualism.

Also availablo on the web: http://www.academia.edu (Accessed June 30, 2016)