Latest / Diplomacy and International Relations / The Civil Sphere

Transcript

The Civil Sphere · Diplomacy and International Relations

• 0:00
  Welcome to Diplomacy and International Relations by
• 0:03
  Bastian Freiborg. And just a quick note before we
• 0:06
  dive in, this analysis is generated with AI and all the
• 0:09
  content has been carefully verified by Bastian Freiborg.
• 0:12
  So today we're really trying to get under the hood, you know,
• 0:15
  understand how societies actually work.
• 0:17
  We'll be looking at the relationship between, well,
• 0:19
  civil society and power, drawing heavily on the analysis in the
• 0:23
  Cook civil sphere. Our mission really is to unpack
• 0:26
  how things like communication rules and that constant push and
• 0:29
  pull between big ideals and everyday realities shape things.
• 0:34
  And this is sort of relevant for understanding international
• 0:37
  relations dynamics between nations and of course within
• 0:39
  nations like Denmark too. Exactly.
• 0:41
  It's easy to just focus on governments, right?
• 0:42
  Formal institutions. But the civil sphere makes a
• 0:45
  really compelling case that civil society itself, through
• 0:48
  all its communication channels, media conversations, social
• 0:50
  movements, it actually wields a lot of influence.
• 0:53
  But, and this is key for democracies to really function,
• 0:57
  that commutative side needs the support of more formal
• 1:00
  regulative institutions, things backed by actual state power.
• 1:04
  Right. So it's not just talk, there
• 1:05
  needs to be structure. Let's dig into that idea of
• 1:08
  civil power. The book mentions things like
• 1:10
  voting, political parties. How do they create power, not
• 1:14
  just reflect it? Well, it's about how these
• 1:16
  mechanisms allow individual views to kind of come together
• 1:20
  to coalesce. They translate opinions into
• 1:24
  real effects on how societies run.
• 1:27
  It's not just about shouting into the void.
• 1:28
  It's about having ways to genuinely shape policy, hold
• 1:32
  leaders accountable. And that brings us to the idea
• 1:34
  of office. Yes, exactly.
• 1:36
  Office. It's presented as more than just
• 1:38
  a position. It's a like a social invention.
• 1:40
  A social invention? OK, so not just a desk and a
• 1:43
  title. What's the big deal about Office
• 1:45
  then? Think of it as a role that's
• 1:47
  deliberately set up with Universal expectations, ethical
• 1:51
  rules, legal limits. And that framework is so
• 1:54
  important because it tries to stop people in power,
• 1:56
  government, business, wherever, from just acting out of
• 1:59
  self-interest or only helping their own small group.
• 2:01
  It's like a. Built in check.
• 2:03
  Kind of, yeah. An institutionalized way to
• 2:05
  demand accountability. It's something that's developed
• 2:07
  over a long time. OK, so we might share some basic
• 2:11
  moral ideas in a society, maybe even internationally, but that
• 2:15
  doesn't mean we all want the same things.
• 2:18
  But the book says these shared values are still vital.
• 2:20
  Why? Because even if our goals
• 2:23
  differ, these shared moral threads give us a common
• 2:26
  language, a framework to even talk to each other.
• 2:29
  And that's absolutely crucial, especially in diverse places
• 2:31
  like Denmark, right, For navigating disagreements,
• 2:34
  keeping some level of social order.
• 2:35
  Without it, it's just people talking past each other.
• 2:38
  Pretty much. It gets incredibly hard for
• 2:40
  different groups, even ones with really conflicting agendas, to
• 2:43
  find any common ground to understand where the other is
• 2:47
  coming from. All right now thinking about how
• 2:49
  we even decide what's right or wrong.
• 2:51
  The book points out this tension.
• 2:53
  We often split things into rational and universal versus
• 2:57
  particular or irrational. Like good is abstract, bad is
• 3:01
  tied to specific, maybe strongly held beliefs.
• 3:04
  But it argues civil society talk isn't abstract at all.
• 3:08
  That's a really central point. It suggests civil discourse
• 3:11
  isn't just floating up in the clouds of theory.
• 3:14
  It's deeply rooted in concrete things, in stories, in
• 3:18
  narratives, origin myths, you know, the tales nations tell
• 3:21
  about themselves. Like foundational stories?
• 3:24
  Exactly. Think about American stories of
• 3:26
  the ancient Constitution, or Puritan heroes, revolutionary
• 3:30
  figures. Those shaped the whole language
• 3:32
  of liberty. And on the flip side, the
• 3:34
  language of repression gets shaped by stories too, about
• 3:38
  troublemakers, loyalists, later maybe immigrant groups seen as
• 3:42
  threats. Yeah, I can see how that applies
• 3:44
  to discussions about Danish history and identity too.
• 3:46
  It definitely shapes who feels included and sometimes, sadly,
• 3:50
  who doesn't. Then the book brings in Carl
• 3:52
  Schmidt, his whole friend enemy thing.
• 3:54
  He thought that came purely from the state, right?
• 3:56
  He did, Schmidt basically said. The state, the organized
• 3:59
  political entity, gets to decide who's the friend and who's the
• 4:02
  enemy, full stop. He kind of dismissed all the
• 4:04
  moral arguments in civil society, called them symbolic
• 4:07
  wrestling's weak liberalism. But the book offers a different
• 4:11
  take. Yes, a really important
• 4:13
  contrast. It suggests that this friend,
• 4:15
  enemy binary doesn't only come from the state power struggle.
• 4:19
  It can also emerge from the moral language the symbolic
• 4:22
  lines drawn within civil society itself.
• 4:26
  And those lines, those moral boundaries, could potentially
• 4:29
  act as a kind of check on the state, a way to regulate state
• 4:32
  power based on shared norms. That gives us a different lens
• 4:36
  for international relations then, not just power politics,
• 4:39
  but also norms, public discourse.
• 4:42
  Precisely, it opens up the idea that maybe international
• 4:45
  conflict isn't just born in state strategy rooms, but also
• 4:49
  in the moral language we use everyday within our own
• 4:51
  societies. That's a big thought, especially
• 4:53
  thinking about public opinion's role in foreign policy, even
• 4:56
  here in Denmark. Speaking of public opinion, the
• 4:59
  book talks about George Gallup and polling.
• 5:00
  He defended it, saw it as helpful for civil discourse.
• 5:04
  Yeah, Gallup argued polling could ground the conversation in
• 5:08
  factual observations. Give a more realistic picture
• 5:10
  than just listening to the lattice activist groups.
• 5:13
  He worried about pressure groups.
• 5:14
  He did. He worried about outside
• 5:17
  pressure. Aggressive minorities may be
• 5:20
  distorting the picture of what most people thought.
• 5:23
  For him, scientific polling could kind of purify public
• 5:26
  opinion, bridge the gap between ordinary people and their
• 5:30
  representatives. Which seems relevant today with
• 5:32
  social media and all the noise. How do we know what the public
• 5:36
  really thinks on big issues like international agreements or
• 5:39
  conflicts? It's a constant challenge, isn't
• 5:42
  it? And understanding that public
• 5:43
  sentiment, say what the Danish public feels about a certain
• 5:46
  international issue, that definitely feeds into the
• 5:49
  political decision making. OK.
• 5:50
  And then there's the left, right divide.
• 5:52
  Political parties, The book calls them ideological shifters,
• 5:55
  using that left right spectrum to connect everything back to
• 5:58
  these big civil society narratives.
• 6:01
  Liberation. Repression.
• 6:02
  Exactly. They use that division to
• 6:04
  mobilize people, link current events to those deeper stories,
• 6:08
  and yeah, it often polarizes society.
• 6:10
  We see that clearly. We definitely see that
• 6:12
  polarization in Danish politics. And Robert McIver of a
• 6:15
  sociologist mentioned talked about the party system relying
• 6:18
  on this alignment of opinion from right to left.
• 6:21
  Even if the specific issues change that basic structure,
• 6:24
  that polarization is kind of fundamental to how parties work.
• 6:28
  They tap into those core civil values, take sides, and generate
• 6:31
  what the book calls civil power. And that domestic political
• 6:35
  scene, the way it's divided, inevitably shapes how a country
• 6:38
  like Denmark acts on the world stage.
• 6:40
  Undeniably, a nation's foreign policy doesn't happen in a
• 6:44
  vacuum. It's deeply influenced by its
• 6:46
  internal political dynamics. Let's circle back to office.
• 6:49
  We set it to check with ethical and legal constraints.
• 6:53
  The idea is to stop power becoming just about
• 6:55
  self-interest or group interest. the US presidency is an example.
• 6:59
  How broadly does the supply? It's meant to embody more
• 7:02
  universal idea of authority, something that grew stronger as
• 7:05
  the civil sphere itself developed.
• 7:07
  Think about the scrutiny presidents, prime ministers,
• 7:10
  even CE OS face in democratic societies.
• 7:13
  That's civil regulation in action.
• 7:15
  Holding power accountable. Yes, the book even uses the
• 7:18
  American Revolution as an example.
• 7:20
  The way the colonists talked about King George the Third,
• 7:23
  framing his actions using the negative language of civil
• 7:26
  society, calling him arbitrary, tyrannical.
• 7:29
  It shows the demand for accountability from the top has
• 7:31
  deep roots. And that principle is
• 7:34
  fundamental to Danish governance too, of course.
• 7:36
  But what about when things breakdown, When there's
• 7:39
  injustice, misuse of power? The book talks about civil
• 7:43
  repair. Law plays a big role here.
• 7:45
  A. Huge role law acts as this key
• 7:47
  mechanism for civil repair. It gives people and groups a way
• 7:51
  to challenge power imbalances that happen outside the purely
• 7:55
  political sphere. You know, families, workplaces,
• 7:58
  schools, interactions with officials.
• 8:00
  They can use legal counterpower. Can you give an example?
• 8:02
  Well, historical examples include things like parishioners
• 8:04
  suing ministers, wives challenging husbands under older
• 8:08
  laws or more recently and significantly, the civil rights
• 8:11
  movement using the courts to fight racial discrimination.
• 8:15
  And the legal scholar Kenji Yoshino has quoted saying that
• 8:18
  when minority groups face prejudice and can't easily build
• 8:21
  political coalitions, the courts stepping in is actually crucial
• 8:24
  for democracy. It's about keeping faith with
• 8:27
  the democratic process, not breaking it.
• 8:29
  OK, but this whole idea of shared civility, it can be
• 8:32
  twisted, right? It used to exclude people.
• 8:34
  The book looks at how nationalism can define civility
• 8:37
  in a way that casts minorities as outsiders, even threats.
• 8:41
  Yeah, this is the really important, often dark side of
• 8:44
  it. Nationalist ideas can absolutely
• 8:46
  construct internal minorities as foreign, as dangerous to the
• 8:50
  nation's security or its culture.
• 8:52
  John Heim's concept of nativism, that intense hostility towards
• 8:55
  an internal minority because they're seen as having foreign
• 8:58
  ties, captures this perfectly. And history is full of examples.
• 9:02
  Sadly, yes, from how various immigrant groups have been
• 9:05
  treated in the US and elsewhere. To.
• 9:07
  Awful historical cases in Europe, like the Dreyfus affair
• 9:11
  in France or the persecution of Jewish people in Nazi Germany.
• 9:14
  This exclusionary aspect of national identity has real,
• 9:18
  often terrible, consequences for international relations.
• 9:20
  To fueling. Xenophobia and prejudice.
• 9:23
  Globally. But looking at positive forces
• 9:25
  for change, social movements, how do they fit into civil
• 9:29
  society, according to the book. Social movements are presented
• 9:32
  as really vital translators. They take specific problems,
• 9:35
  specific grievances, and translate them into the broader
• 9:38
  language, the wider concerns of civil society.
• 9:41
  They connect particular struggles to universal ideals
• 9:43
  like justice or equality. Making a specific issue resonate
• 9:46
  more broadly. Exactly.
• 9:47
  The civil rights movement is the classic example.
• 9:49
  Again. They managed to shift public
• 9:51
  opinion, get regulatory responses from people in office,
• 9:54
  partly by framing racial domination in terms that
• 9:56
  resonated with core civil values.
• 9:59
  And the media was crucial there. Wasn't it shaping how people saw
• 10:01
  events like the Montgomery Bus Boycott or the Selma marches?
• 10:05
  Definitely OK. The final deep dive is into a
• 10:08
  very specific, complex case. Jewish assimilation.
• 10:11
  It sounds like it really pulls together these threads of
• 10:14
  universalism versus particularity it.
• 10:16
  Really does. The history of Jewish
• 10:18
  assimilation is explored as a powerful case study of these
• 10:21
  ongoing tensions. Often Jewish identity was
• 10:24
  constructed from the outside, using that discourse of
• 10:27
  repression, which made full inclusion difficult.
• 10:30
  And there were internal debates too.
• 10:32
  Oh yes, big debates within Jewish communities themselves,
• 10:35
  for instance between Reformed Judaism, which sometimes
• 10:38
  emphasized adapting to secular society, and Orthodox or
• 10:42
  Conservative viewpoints that might prioritize religious
• 10:45
  tradition over civil emancipation.
• 10:47
  Interesting, and Karl Marx had a take on this.
• 10:49
  He did. Marx had this critique
• 10:51
  suggesting that bourgeois civil society, with its split between
• 10:54
  public life and private life, actually produces the social
• 10:57
  category of the Jew. A quite provocative argument.
• 11:01
  And tragically, anti-Semitism wasn't absent even within some
• 11:05
  socialist movements, adding another layer of complexity.
• 11:08
  What things shifted after World War 2?
• 11:10
  In many places, yes. The post war era saw significant
• 11:13
  shifts, particularly in America. There were conscious efforts at
• 11:16
  civil repair, using media popular culture to challenge old
• 11:20
  stereotypes. Think about changing
• 11:22
  representations in films and books.
• 11:24
  The book even mentions Woody Allen's Annie Hall as reflecting
• 11:28
  a different, more complex stage in the representation of Jewish
• 11:30
  identity in American Society. It's a whole journey showing how
• 11:33
  hard it can be and how long it can take to integrate diverse
• 11:37
  groups fully into a national civil sphere.
• 11:39
  Wow. OK, so pulling it all together,
• 11:41
  this exploration of the civil sphere really paints a picture
• 11:44
  of, well, just how intricate things are.
• 11:46
  This constant interplay between civil society, state power, big
• 11:50
  ideals and very specific identities.
• 11:52
  It's a dynamic process, not static at all.
• 11:55
  And understanding these dynamics feels essential not just for
• 11:58
  academics, but for anyone interested in how countries like
• 12:01
  Denmark operate internally and how they engage with the wider
• 12:05
  world. International relations, global
• 12:07
  politics, these tensions, these ways of finding resolution
• 12:10
  through discourse, law, social movements, even the challenges
• 12:14
  of inclusion, they give us a real toolkit for analyzing
• 12:17
  conflicts and cooperation globally.
• 12:19
  Absolutely. It pushes you to look beyond
• 12:22
  just the surface level of political events and see the
• 12:25
  deeper currents of civil society at play.
• 12:27
  We really hope this deep dive has given you some food for
• 12:30
  thought. We definitely encourage you to
• 12:32
  explore these ideas further, think about how they connect to
• 12:34
  current events, international trends, maybe even Danish
• 12:37
  politics today. Thank you so much for joining us
• 12:40
  on Diplomacy and International Relations by Bastian Freiborg.
• 12:43
  If you found this discussion insightful, please do consider
• 12:46
  following the podcast and leaving.
• 12:48
  A five star rating would be fantastic.
• 12:50
  It really helps us reach more listeners interested in these
• 12:51
  topics.