Treść książki

Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
Partnerships,democratizationandrationalizationoftheinstitutionalstructures
9
compromiseandotherassociationsaretheadvantageofthepartnershiptermi-
nology.Institutionally,conceptsofpartnershiparemostoftenproposedbydif-
ferentpragmaticallyorientedmodelsofinternational,inter-sectoral,inter-
organizationalandinterpersonalcooperation,creationoforganizationaland
functionalhybridsthatmediatebetweenthestateandsociety,hierarchy(tradi-
tionaladministration)andmarket(companiesoperatingonacompetitivemar-
ket),keygroupsofsocialandpoliticalinterest(capitalandwork,EUinstitutions
andmemberstates,etc.).Whenthecharacterofrelationsbetweenbasicsocial
groupsisevaluated,conceptsofpartnershipareinthemiddleofthescaledeter-
mined,ontheonehand,bytheconceptsofantagonismsandstruggle,andonthe
other,bysolidarityconcepts.Theyarenotintendedtosolveorovercomeoppos-
inginterestsorideologybutratherthemanagementofconflictsandlookingfor
formulasofconsensusbasedoncommoninterestorsharedvalues.
Theconsensuallogicofdecisionmakingcanalsoserveasabasicforthedis-
tinctionbetweenpartnership(republic)democracyandmajoritydemocracy.In
thelatterdecisionsaremadebythemajorityofvoteswhereasinpartnership
democracyattemptsaremadetoworkouttheconsensusbetweenpartners
throughnegotiation,usingrationalargumentswithintheframeworkofdemo-
craticdiscourse(Buksiński2009,p.257andff).Inabroaderdimensionofthe
fundamentalideologicalconfrontationontheprioritiesofasocialmarketecon-
omy,partnershipconceptsareclosertothephilosophyofcommonvaluecrea-
tionandlookingforsynergythanthephilosophyofsocialredistributionand
awelfarestate.
Modernsocialsciencesemphasizethephenomenaofthefarreachingdisinte-
grationoftraditionalsocialbondsinthedevelopedcountriesoftheWest.Thisis
explainedbydifferentfactors,suchasthefarreachingdivisionoflabour,global-
ization,secularization,disillusionmentwiththedestructiveconsequencesofthe
absolutestriveforprofitsorcynicalinstrumentalizationofpublicinstitutionsto
achieveparticularisticbenefits,etc.Itisusuallyacceptedthattheinstitutionsof
partnershipandsocialparticipationareorcanbeamechanismconducivetothe
creationofsocialbonds.Butadifferentviewisalsoformulated,accordingto
whichasocialbondisthestartingcondition,withoutwhichpartnershipand
participatoryinstitutionscannotfunctioneffectively.InthiscontextE.K.Austin
(2010)saysthatThesocialandpoliticalconditionsbeginninginthemidtolate
20thcentury,especiallygrowingsocialdiversity,expandingsizeandscopeof
largescaleinstitutions,increasingseparationbetweencitizensandtheirpoliti-
calrepresentativesandgrowingscepticismaboutthelegitimacyofadministra-
tiveactiongroundedinnarrowtechnicalexpertise,hasweakenedsocialcohe-
sion,orthesocialbond,suchthatitnolongerhassufficientstabilityandro-
bustnesstosupportthecreationofmutuallyacceptableactionbytraditional
administrativeprocesses(ł).Attentiontothefrequencyandqualityofpartici-
patorygovernancecanbeunderstoodasawayofrespondingtotheseconditions
inanefforttofindameansforthesocialbondtobe(re)generated,enabling