Glossary for Mike Carr’s
Bioregionalism and Civil Society
Carr, Mike. Bioregionalism and Civil Society: Democratic Challenges to Corporate Globalism. Vancouver: UBC Press, 2004.
Civil society
Civil society has been defined in various ways. Most basically, it concerns human social organization and interaction outside of government and the state. In analyzing society, some people use a two-part model: the state and civil society. Others employ a three-part model, distinguishing civil society from both the economic sphere (corporations, the market system) and the political sphere. Carr uses this three-part model, but with one important change. Normally, analyses of society do not consider the environment, sustainability, and spirituality. Carr, however, integrates these concerns in his theory of civil society, applying an ecological critique of environmental degradation and a cultural critique of the psychological and spiritual problems in contemporary society, and calling for a change in culture as well as economics and social relations.
Ecosocial capital
An expansion of the idea of social capital to include the broader ecological community. Ecosocial capital upholds the basic view of social capital that we are members of a community, the common good and individual good are linked, and that the good life revolves around reciprocity and responsibility. However, in ecosocial capital, culture and human society are considered to be integrated into the greater community of plants and others animals. In Aldo Leopold’s terms, we are seen as plain members of the biotic community. Thus, social capital’s anthropocentric analysis of our relationships, the common good, and reciprocity and responsibility is expanded in an ecocentric way.
Economic man (homo economicus)
A term for the view in neoclassical economics that people are essentially atomistic individuals who above all seek their own material, short-term self-interest through rational means. Social relations are secondary and accidental, and care for the public good is alien to our nature. Our relationship with nature is also of little importance, other than as a source of material goods. In addition, it is assumed that each person acting on their self-interests in a free market (unregulated) economy will create the greatest good for the greatest number. In this belief, “society consists of a set of independent individuals acting to achieve independently arrived at goals guide by the ‘invisible hand’ of a perfectly competitive marketplace” (Carr 44). This is a basic assumption of a capitalist, consumer society, and engenders distrust of and distaste for government regulation and taxation. The free market is believed to be the most effective means to solve social and environmental problems. The concepts of social and ecosocial capital have virtually no place in this perspective.
Human capital
In contrast to social capital which is grounded in human relationships, human capital refers to “those skills and capabilities that are acquired by individuals to enable them to act in new ways. Human capital is embodied in the skills and knowledge in the individual” (Carr 45).
Neoclassical economics
The current formulation of capitalist theory and the dominant view of contemporary economists and politicians, especially in the United States. It is based on the concept of economic man, and thus assumes that the free-market, with minimum regulation, provides the greatest good for the greatest number. In this view, economics should be analyzed and evaluated separately from social and environmental factors, and a healthy consumer economy takes precedence over other concerns. As it is put in a famous (or infamous) statement: “What is good for General Motors is good for the country.” Such a view is sometimes called “economism,” involving the “economization” of society.
Neoliberalism
The dominant view in American political thought (both Republican and Democrat). It takes the view of neoclassical economics and upholds the notion of economic man. In addition, it believes that the best way to promote economic well-being is through transnational corporate globalization, bringing all countries and societies into the capitalist market economy, making them dependent on global capitalism. In this view, countries should move away from self-reliance based on producing food and other goods for themselves. Instead they should raise crops and produce goods that will maximize profit in the international marketplace. In this way, it is believed, all players will maximize material affluence. Foreign policy should be aimed at this goal, through “free trade” agreements (and, if necessary, military means).
Praxis
Praxis is practice that is based on a theory and pursued in a systematic way. It is “the integration of theory and practice” (Carr 48). Praxis could refer to various behaviors, from political practice to religious rituals.
Social capital (as used by Carr, Putnam, and others)
Human interrelationships valuable to both the individual and the common good. It “refers to features of social organization, particularly networks, norms, and relations of trust that facilitate cooperation for mutual benefit” (Carr 43). As such it “refers to and includes norms of cooperation, reciprocity, and mutual aid; relations of trust; and organized social networks. . . . social capital inheres in the structure of relationships of information and trust built between and among individuals. . . . Thus, social capital cannot be measured quantitatively. Rather, it is about relationships. As such, it is already, implicitly at least, an ecological concept” (Carr 17). The result is “generalized reciprocity” in which individuals are moved to care for and aid others, which creates sense of social trust and community identity. Self-interest and social solidarity are reconciled. (See Carr 45.) (See also “ecosocial capital”)
|
