Normativ-Critical Functions of the Civil Society in the Era of Globalization
First Name and Surname: György Jóna e-mail:
[email protected] Institution: College for Health Officers, University of Debrecen Address: 4400, Nyíregyháza, Ungvár sétány 11. Country: Hungary
A Short Preface Looking at globalization process with a wider view, it is of many advantages for the cultural, economical and social life of Europe as well as disadvantages. Recently many studies in social - and natural science have the conclusion that the so interlocked international relation-systems benefit only the principals, and the possessors of the means of production, which does not mean profit for the rest of the society. In the first chapter of our own paper we describe contemporary cultural, economical, and social structure, relationships, processes and problems which have created because of globalization. We use the well-known parts of critical social theory (conceptions of Franfurt School) because we think that they give the most adequate theoretical basis to our startingpoint. In the second chapter we seek solving at above mentioned problems – we are going to realize that the most relevant actor is the restructured civil society in this process. Axel Honneth and Jürgen Habermas, and other critical scholars agreed whit us; according to their thesis the public sphere can control power, capitalism, and globalization.1 We do not want to misunderstanding so before we begin our own analysis, have to define some concepts what we use in this study.
1
Habermas, Jürgen (1971), A társadalmi nyilvánosság szerkezetváltozása (The Changing Structure of Social Public), Budapest: Osiris Kiadó. Honneth, Axel (1997), Elismerés és megvetés (Appreciation and Detestation), Pécs: Jelenkor Kiadó. 1
Define of our Concepts Globalization: The globalization has got numerous definitions. According to the first aspect the globalization contains incomes, ideologies, and culturals which cross national frontier.2 According to the second definition the globalization is a historical process, which change social and economical relationships and structures, therefore the bourgeoisie had been keeping under control social interactions, acts, and governmentals power – all over the world. Szalai Erzsebet and Tamas Gaspar Miklos have called the power of networks an „international financial-economical super-structure”.3 It is of parts the largest financial centres of the world, the international financial institutions and rich transnational companies.4 Finally, according to a lot of scholars (such as sociologists, economists, and philosophers, and so on) the same globalization as abolition of international economical capital and of ideology of neoliberal capitalism (this process has emergenced, since „socialist sytems” has broken up, so monopoly capitalist structure exists in Europe). The three definitions do not contradict for each other, only it stresses the differents sides of phenomenons of complex of globalization. In this study, in aspect of our own train of thought, we use the second definition. If we research increasing globalization of economical processes in aspect of historical, we may find that this process started in XVI. century, when some international relationships have created a world-order, what became a matter that affects many of us in this days. The process of globalization has became devastating after the second world war and produced numerous transnational companies – they have been possessing political, economical and cultural power recently as well. After the „new” – economical system had created further influential structures established, these are promote interests of transnational companies.5 Finally, the international capital does not take boards of states into consideration, it appear everywhere, if finds adequate condictions. 2
George Ritzer (1998), The McDonaldization Thesis. Explorations and Extensions, London: SAGE Publications. 3 Szalai Erzsébet (2001), Gazdasági elit és társadalom a magyarországi újkapitalizmusban (Economical Elit and Society in the Hungarian Newcapitalism), Budapest: Aula Kiadó. Tamás Gáspár Miklós (2001), ’Új kelet európai baloldal’ (New East European Left), Eszmélet, Vol. 6. n0. 5, pp. 30-53. 4 Glatz Ferenc (2001), Globalizáció és nemzeti érdek (Globalization and National Interest), Budapest: MTA. 5 Földes Görgy-Inotai András (2001), A globalizáció kihívásai és Magyarország (Challenges of Globalization and Hungary), Budapest: Napvilág Kiadó. 2
Solidarity-based economy We agree with Ethan Miller’s definition, so quote him: „Like all terms of political struggle, the definition of »solidaritiy economy« is widely contested. For some, it refers to a set of strategies aimed at the abolotion of capitalism and the oppressive social relations that is supports and encourages (this is the most widespread understanding of the term, I believe); for others, it name strategies for »humanizing« the capitalist economy – seeking to supplement capitalist globalization with community-based »social safety nets«. My own use of the term »solidarity economy« resonates with the first stream of thought and practice – seeking to build an economyand culture of solidarity beyond capitalist. The ideas that I develop in this pamphlet are not necessarily identical with the anti-capitalist forms of »economia solidária« (Portuguese – J. Gy.) as they are written about in Brazil (where I am most familiar with the literature) or elsewhere. This pamphlet is less a report on »economia solidária« as it is understood internationally than it is an adaption and synthesis of some »economia solidária« concepts with order streams of thought and practice. My aim is to help open space for useful conversations about a practice of solidarity economics that is adapted to the particular political, economic, and cultural conditions that we face here in the United States.”6 Welfare state We accept reduced definition of welfare state, according to it the welfare state guarantees its citizens essential wealth.7 Critical social theory: We call critical social theory is all conceptions which accepts traditions and thesis of Frankfurt School. Consequently, we will use not only theories of Frankfurt School, but everyone paradigms of scholars whose have adapted critical spirit. They have researced not only the social, economical, and cultural problems but have gave modells of solving on these. Douglas Kellner wrote down: „The critical theory of society of the Frankfurt School continues to excite interest and controversy. The critical theorists have deeply influenced contemporary social theory, philosophy, communications theory and researc, cultural theory, and other disciplines for six decades. The dream of an interdisciplinary social theory continues to animate the sociological imagination. In recent decades there have been many different 6 7
Ethan Miller (2004): Solidarity Economics. www.earthskyexchange.org/solidecon.htm Lévai Katalin (1995), A jóléti állam (The Welfare State), Budapest: T-TWINS Kiadó. 3
attempts to articulate the connections between the economic, political, social, and cultural dimensions of contemporary society in the spirit of critical theory. Furthermore, the ideas, methods, and text of the critical theorists have influenced the ways that many of us continue to view the interplay of theory, cultural, and society. The metaphors of the critical theorists have provided global visions of contemporary societies, ranging from »the totally administered society«, »one-dimensional society«, to »legitimation crisis«”8. Civil society The term of civil society includes, of course, every social movements, voluntary organisations, associations, public foundations and foundations, charity societies, and nongovernmental organisations (NGO); segments of the society which do not have got political, economical, and cultural power – the stratum of citoyen, and working and unemployed of class too. In addition, the social activities of civil society are parts as well, what take part in public affairs and in solving of social problems.9
Create, Mechanisms, and Features of the Globalization If we want to know and understand relationships of globalization accurately, in our own opinion, we have to use Immanuel Wallerstein’s centre – semi-periphey – periphery theory.10 He has analysed recently functions of world economy in his a lot of popular books and articles of scintefic journals. According to it the structure of world economy consits of three parts – it is the same age as world. These „economical blocks” contains well-defined countries but these out of structure at any time; they have been changing their places in system. The above mentioned names of „economical blocks” are: core-countries, semiperipherical states, and periphery countries. The same core-countries as rich, developed states; the semi-peripherical counties are developing states, and the periphery countries are poor, under-developed states. Only the core-countries are possessed of the capital and means of productions. In these days, the capital accumulation is accelerating in core-countries, therefore the capital is steping over frontier of countries to it is estabilishing multinationals and transnationals companies.11 In these companies (as society as well) we find expoitions,
8
Douglas Kellner: Critical Theory Today: Revisiting the Classics. www. Honneth, Axel (1990), ’A racionalizálás dialektikája’ (The Dialectic of Rationalization), Replika, Vol. 3. n0. 2. pp. 84-102. 9
4
commodity fetishism, reificated and alienated relationships, because of capitalist mode of production. Activities cannot be stoped by states or governments. Anyway, if the bourgeoisie do not invest capital in semi-peripferical and periferical countries, then in these states increase unemployment, poverty, and other social problems, they lead to revolution, civil war or kind of different uprising. (Albert Hirschmann, his brilliant books, pointed to protest actions are fruitless efforts as well.12) Consequently, the states (and governments) have depended on multinational companies; they in adverse positions of negotiation, so they sell capacity of working class for little wage to main-actors of globalization – the periphery countries cannot get away from this situation. The state do not put a stop to exploitation of capital therefore the state cannot introduce structures of solidarity-based economy – state has lost its original functions, and became empty.13 The transnationality companies get extra-profit from these countries but do not pay tax there, instead the profit redistributed in core-countries, so the semi-pheriphery and pheripfery states become poor increasingly. For short, in the semi-pheriphery and pheripfery countries are growing social eniquality, on these places are creating unjust structures and institutions. The welfare states have came to an end as well because the capitalist mode of production have not let state interventions.14 Structure of the welfare state has not even been built, because: there is no political wish in the élite to introduce the welfare state; the bourgeoisie do not allow governmental interventions in market process; finally, the social security system is unable to satisfy all demands of the aging society because of shortage of income. Members of the bourgeoisie have been using circulation of reproduction of social, economical, and cultural enequality.15 The bourgeoisie use their own capital (economical
10
Wallerstein, Immanuel (1983), A modern világgazdasági rendszer kialakulása. A tőkés mezőgazdaság és az európai világgazdaság eredete a XVI. században (Formation of Modern Worldtrade System. The origin of the Capitalist Agriculture and the European Worldtrade in the XVI. century), Budapest: Gondolat Kiadó. 11 Karl Marx (1954), A tőke I-III. (The Capital I-III.), Budapest: Kossuth Kiadó. 12 Hirschmann, Albert (1995), Kivonulás, tiltakozás és hűség (Exodus,Protest and Faith), Budapest: Osiris Kiadó. 13 Habermas, Jürgen (1979), ’Kritikai potenciálok a társadalomban’ (Critical Potentials in Society), Kritika, Vol. 24. n0 3. pp. 21-23. and n0 3. pp. 24-26. Habermas, Jürgen (1980), A konzervativizmus és a tőkés valóság (Conservativeness and Capitalist Reality), Valóság, Vol. 29. n0 8. pp. 116-221. 14 Jóna György (2005), Past and Future of the Hungarian Welfare State, http://mail.deefk.hu/uj/018/jona_welfare_handout.pdf 15 Bourdieu, Pierre (1978), A társadalmi egyenlőtlenségek újratermelődése (The Reproduction of Social Disequalities), Budapest: Gondolat Kiadó. 5
capital) to take part in elite education system where they get high social and cultural capital – so the power and every kind of capital remain in elite stratum. „The theory of class reproduction would predict that, despite any turnover in elite personnel, the class composition of the elite remains unchanged. In the eastern European context, it not only predicts that the communist-era nomenklature was made up disproportionately of the children of the intelligentsia, but also that the current elite reports the same social origins.”16 This is an dangerous process, aftermath of it was in 1930s, when the „fascist, communist, and other totalitarian state forms were eroding human rights, and individual freedom, destroying democracy, producing new hierarchies and atavistic ideologies, the classical Enlightenment ideols of freedom, equality, justice, and individualism could be used as norms of social critique. In an inhuman society, humanism possessed socially critical potential.”17 The logic of globalization do not deal with powerty, moreover, differentiate „unworthy poor” from „worthy poor”, after all it create – so the people (and individuum) does not responsible for powerty but the economical, educational and social system. The categories of „unwirth poor” and „wirth poor” are wrong absolutely, these are unacceptable, all these becomes hurry the produce of solidarity-based economy. According to Immanuel Wallerstein the international financial institutionals (for example, Worldbank, International Monetary Fund, and WTO) legitimation and control these processes.18 George Soros decribes these processes and phenomenons him books and articles. According to his viewpoint the predominate of globalization destroy itself because semipheriphery and pheriphery countries do not tolerate the abolition of exploitation and alienation, these are contribute to to end of capitalism (and globalization) – the globalization do not rational and necessary process, actually it destructives and disadvantages. Wonder what is the solving about these problems? Some scholars accept these relationships and structures, in their own oppinions, only these conditions create and guarantee freedom and wealth of mankind. The ideology of (neo)liberalism suggests: „We are taught in school, on the radio, in the papers, and on the TV, that this is all inevitiable – that Bourdieu, Pierre (1983), ’The Forms of Capital’ in John G. Richardson, Handbook of Theory and Research for Sociology of Edication, New York. 16 Hanley, Eric – Mateju, Petr – Vlachova, Klara – Krejci, Jindrich (1998), The Making of Post-Communist Elites in Eastern-Europe. Working Paper of Research Project. www.archiv.soc.cas.cz/stwp/98-4.doc 17 Douglas Kellner (2004), Critical Theory Today: Revisiting. www. 18 Wallerstein, Immanuel (1999), ’Globalizáció vagy az átmenet korszaka?’ (Globalization or the Period of Transition?), Eszmélet, Vol. 8. n0. 3. pp. 17-36. 6
there are only two choises about how an economy can work: capitalism or communism. A system where rich people and corporations have the power, make all the decisions and control our lives; or a system where State bureaucrast have the power, make all the dicions and control our lives. What a choice! If we do not want a communist dictatorship, then being against capitalism is like being against death – it is a bummer, but there is no way out. Right?”19 According to Marx the proletarian revolution and dictatorship of the proletariat is unavoidable.20 But we believe in other solving than revolution – we prefere philosophy of new left, it contains watchwords of three of French Revolutions of the 1789: freedom, equality, solidarity.
Practicable solving
Before we start to give our own solving, on mentioned above problems, want to clear up some thesis. Firstly, we do not know perfect answers about problems of globalization therefore we have got only some conjectures about estabilish of solidarity-based economy, but – we think – our conjctures well-founded scientifically. Secondly, we do not know and want to produce perfect social structure because it create dictaturships inevitably – it is obviosly. We do not wish to ram down our ideas on everybody – we follow spirit of ideology of the Frankfurt School. Foundations of the solidarity-based economy may build, if they organic parts of social process – they must to be bottom-up planning. In addition, in the deep-structure of society have to create a need which foundation of solidarity-based economy strengthen. Well, the organized civil society (public sphere) suitables can appear its interests in political, cultural and economical field – enough, if we think about globalization critical movements (sometimes called the anti-globalization movement or Global Justice and Solidarity Movement). Fortunately, societies of the European Unio have got technological instruments to strenghten civil sphere. We accept Pine’s thesis: his starting-point that the informational and technological instruments indispensables to civil society organize – civil organizations get
19 20
Ethan Miller 2004: Earthskyexchange.org/solidecon.htm Karl Marx (1954), A tőke I-III. (The Capital I-III.), Budapest: Kossuth Kiadó. 7
accurate information through informational channels what needs their function.21 The civil sphere restructure itself which mechanism contains critical potential: interests of workingclass opposite interests of bourgeoisie and challenges of globalization by civil networks – infrastructure of the modern technology garantee the adequate function of public sphere. The civil society takes aims (such as, solidarity-based economy of foundations are established) and essentials, if this process and organizations start from core-countries. It is important mechanism because civil sphere just going to become legitim and fashionable in European Unio. We would like to stress that (according to our own theory) leads and members of civil society do not want to take the power but they struggle for emergence of structures of more justice of solidarity-based economy. If their aim only take the power than there is no different between globalization critical movements and institutions of mod of capitalist production. Numerous scholars think that these movements are as fall on evil days as movements of 1968. We do not agree with it because the globalization had got a lot of disadvantages (for example exclusion, powerty of child, commercialized relationships, environmental pollution, increase of anti-Semitism and racism, concrentation of capital, exploitation, conflict between work and capital, alienation, reification, capitalist exchange – unequal exchange, social unjustice and inequality, etc.) therefore the civil society (working and unemployed of class) cannot tolerate above mentioned phenomens and do not let their leads corruption. This structure and relationsystem guarantee to civil society promote its interests in political, economical, and cultural stages, the ideology of just distribution, and framework of solidarity-based ecnonomy establish without deform. What is the critical intellectual tasks in establish of solidarity-based economy? We accept theories of Karl Mannhein, Miklos Gaspar Miklos, and Erzsebet Szalai that we have to research relationships, processes, and structure of society, economy, and culture, these are published by scientific publications that ignorance are avoided.22 To this need: at first we collect statistical datas of mentioned civil organizations and trade unions, and then we make sociological seconddissertions and get the important, and relevant datas. From these informations we create a normative strategy to apply that adequate and make a solidaritybased economy in every country within the borderlines. With these methods mentioned below, we could work out normative projects and 21
Pine II., B. J. – Viktor, B. – Boynton, A. C. (1993), ’Making Mass Customization Work’, Harward Business Review, Vol. 71. n0 5, pp. 108-117. 22 Karl Mannhei (1996), Ideológia és utópia (Ideology and Utopia), Budapest: Atlantisz Kiadó. 8
distribute those in every European Union member-state giving universal opportunity to build up a solidarity- based economy, liquidate exclusion, and end up injustice relations in society.
Conclusions Recalling Pierre Bourdieu's exploration, that in every range of those countries which prefer capitalist manufacturing ways, the conversation of economic, cultural and social principals resulted reproduction of social inequalities. This adverse process cannot be stopped even by the chance generating interventions of the state. The reason is that the leadership of globalization is growing, they're getting more power over political system, having cultural and social structure and their branches -, of course -colonized. This kind of progress can be observed in every country in the European Union without exception, but with diverse intesiveness. This will lead to - using the terminology of Immanuel Wallerstein - the lack of political spheres in the semiperiferial and periferial countries, important political spheres which are to protect their citizens from the harmful effects of globalization, but unable to do that, therefore the civil society and its organizations will have to deal with the main part of this project. / Nowadays Germany, France, Italy and Spain -even the centre countries have to face this problem unfortunately ./ Hans Peter Martin and Harald Schumann authors show us very adequate through many of their studies how can these tendecies mean jeopardy for the countries of the EU by getting poor, isolated and excluded in wide range of civil society.23 The power of the benevolent force that keeps society in union and integrates that, is disappearing, getting more plastic. The Union level socialpolitical life despite of that can be called as capitalist policy, which is not meant to erase poorness, only tries to handle it. Jürgen Habermas pointed that capitalist producting is not rational any more, but instrumental. This can be seen in the accelerating pollution of nature, which does not care about the future of our new generation all because its profitorient conscious. Erich Fromm has revealed that materialistic conscious and exclusion in society cause exaggerated individualism, which diverge the person to different roles in society losing his original identity, his human substrate.24 Bourdieu said that this process would not be limited, 23 Martin, Hans-Peter – Schumann, Harald (1998), A globalizáció csapdája (The trap of Globalization), Budapest: Perfekt Kiadó. 24 Fromm, Erich (1993), A szeretet művészete (The Art of Love), Budapest: Háttér Kiadó.
9
because the agenda of the capitals need this sphere of isolated people to stay in this situation, since they have any, or mostly superficial interpersonal relationships, so they cannot gether and demonstrate against capitalist exploitage. I wonder what can be a resolution for this common problem? The representors of critical social theory offer us adequate and normative alternatives. They think that the main duty of civil societies of the European Union is compromising common good and welfare with private profit, or to temper these opposings at least. In another way (in other words): During its optional working, the progressive civil society reinforces the democratic governance, so that the relationsystem of the state and the society remains plural, the civil cooperation in governmental cases gets effective, the ways of distributive justice come true (because of the completion of solidarity), in this way the global economic processes can be ruled and will be more caculable and solidaric. In this particular case the governmental and macroeconomical cases will be infulenced by the civil society, which will help to attain the three main keywords of the French Revolution of the 1789. The growing effect of social interest vindication through the channels of redistribution (social insurance service and tax policy), aiming the ones in need more direct, what gives a special protection for the developing macroeconomy. It means that the market does not need to be ended, but has to be excluded to where it belongs, and pushed out from the private -and intim spheres of the society. Nowadays only civil society has the appropriate methods for that. The reinforcement of the civil society will bring a temperative influence on the isolated spheres and integrates society itself. Civil society in the Union has its benevolent power to support welfare and hold back the harmful effects of globalization, and even multiply the positive ones. The conflict between the welfare countries and globalization can easily ruin and rule the future of Europe. If the solidarity – based economical system loses - or gives up its achievements in the competition against neoliberalistic logic - that will in long term unleash disequality and injustice in our societies.
Fromm, Erich (1993), Menekülés a szabadság elől (Escaping from Freedom), Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. Fromm, Erich (1994), Birtokolni vagy létezni. Egy új társadalom alapvetése (To Have or To Be. Creation of a New Society), Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
10
References: •
Adorno, Theodor W. (1986), Kritikai elmélet és tiltakozási mozgalom (Critical Theory and Demonstrating Movement), Budapest: Filozófiai Füzetek.
•
Andrew, Arató András (1999), Civil társadalom, forradalom és alkotmány (Civil Society, Revolution and Constitution), Budapest: Új Mandátum Kiadó.
•
Ash, Timothy Garton (1990), The Magic Lantern. The Revolution of Witnessed in Warsaw, Budapest, Berlin and Prague, New York: Random House.
•
Beck, Ulrich (2003), Rizikótársadalom (Risk-society), Budapest: Századvég Kiadó.
•
Bence György – Kis János – Márkus György (1992), Hogyan lehetséges a kritikai gazdaságtan? (How can critical economy be possible?), Budapest: T-Twins Kiadó – Lukács Archívum.
•
Bourdieu, Pierre (1978), A társadalmi egyenlőtlenségek újratermelődése (The Reproduction of Social Disequalities), Budapest: Gondolat Kiadó.
•
Bourdieu, Pierre (1983), ’The Forms of Capital’ in John G. Richardson, Handbook of Theory and Research for Sociology of Edication, New York
•
Bourdieu, Pierre (1992): ’A neoliberalizmus lényege’ (The Essence of Neoliberalism), Világosság, Vol. 8, no 2, pp. 612-615.
•
Brian, G. A. Christopher – Mokrzycki, Edmund, eds. (1994), ’The New Great Tranformation? Change and Continuity in East-Central-Europe’, London and New York: Routledge.
•
Derrida, Jacques - Habermas, Jürgen (2003), ’Európa. Az elveszett azonosságtudat nyomában’ (Searching for Lost Identity), Élet és Irodalom, Vol. 36, no 6, pp. 13.
•
Ethan Miller (2004): Solidarity Economics. www.earthskyexchange.org/solidecon.htm
•
Ethan Miller 2004: Earthskyexchange.org/solidecon.htm
•
Forrester, Viviane (1998), Gazdasági horror (Economic Horror), Budapest: Kossuth Kiadó.
•
Földes Görgy-Inotai András (2001), A globalizáció kihívásai és Magyarország (Challenges of Globalization and Hungary), Budapest: Napvilág Kiadó.
•
Fromm, Erich (1993), A szeretet művészete (The Art of Love), Budapest: Háttér Kiadó.
•
Fromm, Erich (1993), Menekülés a szabadság elől (Escaping from Freedom), Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
11
•
Fromm, Erich (1994), Birtokolni vagy létezni. Egy új társadalom alapvetése (To Have or To Be. Creation of a New Society), Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
•
Fromm, Erich (1996), Az emberi szív (The Human Heart), Budapest: Háttér Kiadó.
•
Gazsó Ferenc – Laki László (2004), Fiatalok az újkapitalizmusban (Youth in Newcapitalism), Budapest: Napvilág Kiadó.
•
George Ritzer (1998), The McDonaldization Thesis. Explorations and Extensions, London: SAGE Publications.
•
Glatz Ferenc (1997), Globalizáció és nemzeti érdek (Globalization and National Interest), Budapest: MTA.
•
Glatz Ferenc (2001), Globalizáció és nemzeti érdek (Globalization and National Interest), Budapest: MTA
•
Gosta Esping – Andersen (1999), Social Foundations of Postindustrial Economies, Oxford: University Press.
•
Gosta Esping-Andersen: The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Blackwell Publishers: é. n.
•
Grubacic, Andrej-Adamovsky, Ezequiel (2003), Global Movement: Interviewing Adamovsky. www.zmak.org/sustainers/content/2003-06/19grubacic-adamovsky.cfm.
•
Habermas, Jürgen – Lyotard, Jean-Francois (1993), A posztmodern állapot (The postmodern Case), Budapest: Századvég Kiadó.
•
Habermas, Jürgen (1971), A társadalmi nyilvánosság szerkezetváltozása (The Changing Structure of Social Public), Budapest: Osiris Kiadó.
•
Habermas, Jürgen (1979), ’Kritikai potenciálok a társadalomban’ (Critical Potentials in Society), Kritika, Vol. 24. n0 3. pp. 21-23. and n0 3. pp. 24-26.
•
Habermas, Jürgen (1980), A konzervativizmus és a tőkés valóság (Conservativeness and Capitalist Reality), Valóság, Vol. 29. n0 8. pp. 116-221.
•
Habermas, Jürgen (1983), Marxizmus, utópia, remény (Marxism, Utopia, Hope), Budapest: Rajk László Szakkollégium.
•
Habermas, Jürgen (1985), ’Mit nevezünk ma válságnak?’ ( What Do We Call Crisis Today?), Szociológiai Figyelő, Vol. 9. n0. 1. pp. 23-38.
•
Habermas, Jürgen (1986) ’A jóságos uralkodó utópiája’ (The Utopia of The Benevolent Ruler), Magyar Filozófiai Szemle, Vol. 6. n0. 1-2. pp. 129-135.
12
•
Habermas, Jürgen (1986), ’Magyarázatok a kommunikatív cselekvés fogalmához’ (Explanations for The Concept of Communicative Act), Magyar Filozófiai Szemle, Vol. 29. n0. 1-2. pp. 175-200.
•
Habermas, Jürgen (1986), ’Marx és a belső gyarmatosítás tétele’ (Marx and The Theory of Inner Colonization), Magyar Filozófiai Szemle, Vol. 29. n0. 1-2. pp. 136174.
•
Habermas, Jürgen (1986), A kommunikatív cselekvés elmélete (The Theory of Communicative Act), Budapest: Eötvös Lóránt Tudományegyetem.
•
Habermas, Jürgen (1991), ’Mit jelent a szocializmus ma? A „helyrehozó forradalom” és a baloldali gondolkodás megújulásának szükségessége’ (What does Socialism Mean Today? The Resolving Revolution and The Need of Renewal in the Left), Világosság, Vol. 19. n0. 2. pp. 104-117.
•
Habermas, Jürgen (1991), ’Pótló forradalom és a baloldali revízió szükséglete’ (Replacing Revolution and The Left Revision), Társadalomtudományi Közlemények, 2. Vol. n0. 1-2. pp. 3-125.
•
Habermas, Jürgen (1994), A társadalomtudományok logikája (The Logic of Social Science), Budapest: Atlantisz Kiadó.
•
Habermas, Jürgen (1994), Válogatott tanulmányok (Selected Studies), Budapest: Atlantisz Kiadó.
•
Habermas, Jürgen (1995), ’Megismerés és érdek’ (Knowing and Interest), Magyar Filozófiai Szemle, Vol. 34. n0. 5-6. pp. 58-71.
•
Hanley, Eric – Mateju, Petr – Vlachova, Klara – Krejci, Jindrich (1998), The Making of Post-Communist Elites in Eastern-Europe. Working Paper of Research Project. www.archiv.soc.cas.cz/stwp/98-4.doc
•
Hanley, Eric – Mateju, Petr-Vlachová, Klára-Krejci, Jindrich (1998), The Making of Post-Communist Elites in Eastern-Europe. www.archiv.soc.cas.cz/stwp/98-4.doc.
•
Heller Ágnes – Fehér Ferenc (1993), A modernitás ingája (The Pendulum of Modernity), Budapest: T-Twins Kiadó.
•
Hirschmann, Albert (1995), Kivonulás, tiltakozás és hűség (Exodus,Protest and Faith), Budapest: Osiris Kiadó.
•
Honneth, Axel (1990), ’A racionalizálás dialektikája’ (The Dialectic of Rationalization), Replika, Vol. 3. n0. 2. pp. 84-102.
13
•
Honneth, Axel (1997), Elismerés és megvetés (Appreciation and Detestation), Pécs: Jelenkor Kiadó.
•
Horkheimer, Max – Adorno, Theodor W. (1990), A felvilágosodás dialektikája (The Dialectic of Enlightement), Budapest: Gondolat – Atlantisz - Medvetánc Kiadó.
•
Jóna György (2005), Past and Future of the Hungarian Welfare State, http://mail.deefk.hu/uj/018/jona_welfare_handout.pdf
•
Kapitány Ágnes – Kapitány Gábor (1995), ’A szellemi termelési módról’ (About The Intellectual Production Method), Eszmélet, Vol. 5. n0. 2. pp. 147-161.
•
Kapitány Balázs (2002), ’A rizikótársadalom másfél évtizede’ ( The One and Half Decade of Risksociety), Szociológiai Szemle, Vol. 3. n0. 1. pp. 123-135.
•
Karl Mannhei (1996), Ideológia és utópia (Ideology and Utopia), Budapest: Atlantisz Kiadó.
•
Karl Marx (1954), A tőke I-III. (The Capital I-III.), Budapest: Kossuth Kiadó.
•
Krémer Balázs (1996), ’Ami az állam és a civil szféra között van’ (What is Between the State and the Civil Shpere), Mozgó Világ, Vol. 36. n0. 9. pp. 31-50.
•
Lányi Kamilla (2001), ’Vázlat a globalizációnak nevezett jelenségkör értelmezéséről’ (Draft About The Understanding of So Called Globalization), Közgazdasági Szemle, Vol. 9. n0. 6. pp. 498-519.
•
Lévai Katalin (1995), A jóléti állam (The Welfare State), Budapest: T-TWINS Kiadó.
•
Marcuse, Herbert (1982), Ész és forradalom (Reason and Revolution), Budapest: Gondolat Kiadó.
•
Marcuse, Herbert (1990), Az egydimenziós ember (The One-dimensional Man), Budapest: Kossuth Kiadó.
•
Martin, Hans-Peter – Schumann, Harald (1998), A globalizáció csapdája (The trap of Globalization), Budapest: Perfekt Kiadó.
•
Nagy Pál (1993), Posztmodern háromszögelési pontok: Lyotard, Habermas, Derrida. (Postmodern trianglic points :Lyotard, Habermas,Derrida.), Párizs-Bécs-Budapest: Magyar Műhely.
•
Navrasics Tibor (1998), Területi érdekképviselet az EU-ban (Local Interestrepresentation in the EU), Társadalmi Szemle, Vol. 24. n0. 1. pp. 47-71.
•
Offe, Claus (1991), Capitalism by Democratic Design? Democratic Theory Facing the Triple Transition in East-Central-Europe. Paper Presented to Ipsa Congress, Buenos Aires, July.
14
•
Pine II., B. J. – Viktor, B. – Boynton, A. C. (1993), ’Making Mass Customization Work’, Harward Business Review, Vol. 71. n0 5, pp. 108-117.
•
Rawls, John (1997), Az igazságosság elmélete (The Theory of Justice), Budapest: Osiris Kiadó.
•
Seligman, Adam B. (1997), A civil társadalom eszméje (The Idea of Civil Society), Budapest: Kávé Kiadó.
•
Szabó Máté (1998), Az EU és a civil szervezetek. (The EU and the Civil Organizations), Politikatudományi Szemle, Vol. 10. n0. 3. pp. 250-287.
•
Szabó Máté (1999), Környezetvédelmi civil kezdeményezések Magyarországon (Environmental and Civil Initiatives in Hungary), Budapest: Villányi úti könyvek.
•
Szabó Máté (2000), Globális civil társadalom? (Global Civil Society?), Budapest: Villányi úti könyvek.
• Szabó Máté (2001), Társadalmi mozgalmak és politikai tiltakozás (Social Movements and Political Protest), Budapest: Rejtjel Kiadó. •
Szalai Erzsébet (1994), A civil társadalomtól a politikai társadalom felé. Munkástanácsok, 1989-1993 (From Civil Society towards Political Society. Labour Councils, 1989-1993), Budapest: T-Twins Kiadó.
•
Szalai Erzsébet (2001), Gazdasági elit és társadalom a magyarországi újkapitalizmusban (Economical Elit and Society in the Hungarian Newcapitalism), Budapest: Aula Kiadó.
•
Szalai Erzsébet (2002), ’Globalizáció, rendszerváltás, szegénység – az értelmiség felelőssége’ (Globalization, Change of Regime, Poorness- the Responsibility of Intellectuals), Szociológiai Szemle, Vol. 39. n0. 4. pp. 208-212.
•
Szalai Erzsébet (2003), ’Az én trónfosztása’ (The Dethronement of Identity), Népszabadság, march 22. pp. 19-20.
•
Szalai Erzsébet (2003), ’Az újkapitalizmus intézményesülése – és válsága’ (The Institutionism of Newcapitalism- and its Crisis), Népszabadság, october 25. pp. 17-18.
•
Szalai Erzsébet (2004), Az első válaszkísérlet (The First Trial of Answering), Budapest: Nemzeti Tankönyvkiadó.
•
Szalai Júlia (2002), ’Társadalmi kirekesztődés’ (Social Exclusion), Szociológiai Szemle, Vol. 29. n0. 4. pp. 34-50.
•
Tamás Gáspár Miklós (2001), ’Új kelet európai baloldal’ (New East European Left), Eszmélet, Vol. 6. n0. 5, pp. 30-53.
15
•
Tamás Gáspár Miklós (2004), ’Válság, esély, kiút’ (Crisis, Chance, Solution), Élet és Irodalom, Vol. 39. n0 33, pp. 4-5.
•
Wallerstein, Immanuel (1983), A modern világgazdasági rendszer kialakulása. A tőkés mezőgazdaság és az európai világgazdaság eredete a XVI. században (Formation of Modern Worldtrade System. The origin of the Capitalist Agriculture and the European Worldtrade in the XVI. century), Budapest: Gondolat Kiadó.
•
Wallerstein, Immanuel (1999), ’Globalizáció vagy az átmenet korszaka?’ (Globalization or the Period of Transition?), Eszmélet, Vol. 8. n0. 3. pp. 17-36.
•
Went, Robert (2002), Globalizáció. Neoliberális feladatok, radikális válaszok (Globalization. Neoliberalistic Projects, Radical Answers), Budapest: Perfekt Gazdasági Tanácsadó, Oktató és Kiadó Rt.
16
