Page 230 - Contemporary Political Sociology Globalization Politics and Power

216 Globalization and Democracy

engagement in creating “ best practice ” for businesses is, therefore, crucial
(Keane, 2003 : 75 – 88).
Including capitalist markets within definitions of “ global civil society, ”

however, brings it uncomfortably close to neo - liberal ideals of economic
globalization for many analysts and social movement activists. Neo - liberal
globalization is entirely compatible with Keane ’ s version of “ civil society ”
insofar as both are concerned to enlarge social space outside states. Civil
society actors may then be associated with neo - liberal projects to mini-

mize the regulation of flows of capital and goods in order to promote
global markets. Indeed, it becomes much more diffi cult to ignore those
right - wing think tanks and lobbying organizations that explicitly seek to
do so: they are also NGOs. Corporations are not inert, passive partici-
pants in globalization; they actively engage in trying to shape its condi-

tions in ways that are beneficial to their shareholders (Tonkiss, 2005 : 71).
In this respect, they are engaged in a project that is very similar to that
of other NGOs, though with very different aims and for different
benefi ciaries.
Global civil society has been formed quite differently from civil societies
in Latin America and Eastern Europe. Although there is no world state,
the formation of global civil society has been actively encouraged in rela-
tion to state - like international political institutions. In fact, it has, in large
part, been fostered by the United Nations. Richard Falk argues that, since
the environmental summit in Stockholm in 1972, which was planned as
a dialogue exclusively between representatives of governments, but at
which the unexpected presence of environmentalist groups became the
main attraction for the media and for delegates, the UN has actively
encouraged global civil society in the form of NGO participation in world
conferences on human rights, environmental sustainability and develop-
ment (Falk, 1998 ). Other international political institutions have inadver-
tently stimulated the growth of civil society precisely because they lack
transparency and accountability. The most spectacular example here is
the meetings of the IGOs of economic governance which have provided
a focus for social movement politics. As well as the regular demonstrations
of “ anti - globalization ” protestors, which became most dramatically visible
around the world with the “ Battle of Seattle ” in 1999, these institutions
are also now the target of concerted campaigns for their reform. Indeed,
as Neera Chandhoke points out, NGOs now attend the meetings of the
World Bank and the IMF as special guests, where they are actively involved
in decision - making and implementing projects (Chandhoke, 2002 : 44).
How does global civil society further democracy? Critics argue that, as
global civil society is NGO - led, it is intrinsically undemocratic. Since no