Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12259/32959
Type of publication: Straipsnis kitose duomenų bazėse / Article in other databases (S4)
Field of Science: Sociologija / Sociology (S005)
Author(s): Genys, Dainius
Title: Pilietinio įgalumo iššūkiai : dviejų simptomiškų piletinių bylių tyrimas
Other Title: Challenges for civic emprowerment : two symptomatic civic defense cases
Is part of: Darbai ir dienos. Kaunas : Vytauto Didžiojo universiteto leidykla, 53 (2010)
Extent: p. 207-224
Date: 2010
Keywords: Pilietiškumas;Iššūkiai;Public spirit;Challenges
Abstract: This article discusses citizenship, civil society, and its empowerment. Michael Walzer‘s thesis that “public interest issues and dedication to public purposes are key signs of civic virtues” can be a good starting point for constructing a definition of citizenship. What conditions have been created for citizens to participate in, and to conduct, public affairs? Is there an officially accepted provision for such activities and channels, or can they be guerilla-like? Finally, what are the rewards for the most active citizens to practice “civic virtues” and what are the motives for other citizens to engage in such activities? With regard to the empowerment of civil society, the focus here is not on the formal, official (associated) participation of civil society organizations, but on the informal movement of civic organizations. By analysing two well-known civic defense cases involving two cinemas in Vilnius and Kaunas, we can see that civic space is monopolized by two other sectors of society: government and business. Government does it by not providing any clearly defined institutional and legal representation for the public interest and for the defense of the public good. And business does it directly by using the power and resources available to it in order to create artificial barriers and indirectly by using clientilistic contacts to put pressure on government so that it does not clearly define the channels enabling civil resolution and thus inhibits civic expression. In this way, the “cost“ of citizenship can be set according to the obstacles for civic expression; i. e., if there are clearly defined and ensured channels for civic expression we can say that the “cost“ is not big, but if in order to protect the public interest and public good such channels are not available, they do not work, or there are additional obstacles to the process, we can say that the “cost“ increases. [...]
Internet: https://eltalpykla.vdu.lt/1/32959
https://www.vdu.lt/cris/bitstream/20.500.12259/32959/1/ISSN2335-8769_2010_N_53.PG_207-224.pdf
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12259/32959
Affiliation(s): Socialinių mokslų fakultetas
Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas
Appears in Collections:Darbai ir dienos / Deeds and Days 2010, nr. 53
Universiteto mokslo publikacijos / University Research Publications

Files in This Item:
marc.xml10.57 kBXMLView/Open

MARC21 XML metadata

Show full item record

Page view(s)

58
checked on Sep 12, 2019

Download(s)

58
checked on Sep 12, 2019

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.