Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T19:35:05.330Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Uses and Abuses of “State and Civil Society” in Contemporary Turkey

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 July 2015

Yael Navaro-Yashin*
Affiliation:
Lecturer in Social Anthropology, The University of Edinburgh

Extract

The categories of “state” and “civil society” have too often been used as oppositional terms in the social sciences and in public discourse. This article aims to problematize the concepts of “state” and “civil society” when perceived as separate and distinct entities in the discourses of social scientists as well as of members of contemporary social movements in Turkey. Rather than readily using state and society as analytical categories referring to essential domains of sociality, the purpose is to transform these very categories into objects of ethnographic study. There has been a proliferation of discourse on “the state” and “the civil society” in Turkey in the 1980s and 1990s. This article emerges out of an observation of the peculiar coalescence of social scientific and public usages of these terms in this period. It aims to radically relativize and to historically contextualize these terms through a close ethnographic study of the various political domains in which they have been discursively employed.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © New Perspectives on Turkey 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bourdieu, Pierre. 1991. Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Comaroff, Jean. 1985. Body of Power, Spirit of Resistance: The History and Culture of a South African People. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foucault, Michel. 1980. The History of Sexuality. Volume One: An Introduction. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
Göle, Nilüfer. 1994. “Toward an Autonomization of Politics and Civil Society in Turkey,” in Heper, Metin and Evin, Ahmet (ed.), Politics in the Third Turkish Republic. Boulder: Westview Press, pp. 213222.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1989. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Hann, Chris and Dunn, Elizabeth. 1996. Civil Society: Challenging Western Models. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Heper, Metin and Evin, Ahmet (ed.). 1994. Politics in the Third Turkish Republic. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Mardin, Şerif. 1987. “Türk Toplumunu İnceleme Aracı Olarak ‘Sivil Toplum’,Defter, December.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Timothy. 1991. “The Limits of the State: Beyond Statist Approaches and their Critics,American Political Science Review, 85(1), pp. 7796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, Timothy. 1990. “Everyday Metaphors of Power,Theory and Society, 19(5), pp. 545577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norton, Augustus Richard (ed.). 1995. Civil Society in the Middle East, Volume 1. Leiden, New York, and Köln: E. J. Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robins, Kevin. 1996. “Interrupting Identities: Turkey/Europe,” in Hall, Stuart and Paul du Gay (ed.), Questions of Cultural Identity. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Sadowski, Yahya. 1993. “The New Orientalism and the Democracy Debate,Middle East Report, 183, July-August, pp. 1421, 40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, James. 1985. Weapons of the Weak: Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Turner, Bryan S. 1984. “Orientalism and the Problem of Civil Society in Islam,” in Hussain, Asaf, Olson, Robert, and Qureishi, Jamil (eds.). Orientalism, Islam, and Islamists. Brattleboro, Vermont: Amana Books.Google Scholar