The next NGO I met with was not what I was expecting! It is a student run newspaper at the major university in MK- Sv. Kiril i Methodi. The newspaper is called Излез/Izlez. They were started 2 years ago, upon the founder’s return to MK from a year abroad. Her grant required her to start a project upon her return. She chose, with a few friends to start a newspaper that is critical of the educational system in MK.
They decided to focus on this because there are many problems with the educational system in MK according to the students in it. This is not the only thing the newspaper focuses on, they also do articles on then environment or other issues that students care about. The newspaper/journal promotes social activism. They will publish articles on local culture or investigative work. They aim to produce 2 issues per semester. This has created a total of 6 issues so far.
When the newspaper started there was no student run media at all (now there are 2 radio stations). People were complaining all the time, but no one was doing anything. They hoped to empower their peers and prove that students can be responsible. There are 8 people on the editorial board, who came together out of a series of meetings about how to best serve the community. (Last year there were 5 editorial board members.)
They have not only worked on the newspaper, but they have also worked on other projects. They helped to digitize the library through a grant they received. They have also donated books to their collection from a grant they recieved. They have applied to other grants, but haven’t heard back yet.
All of the funding sources that they had mentioned so far were foreign, and they stated that finding local sources is very hard. They want to try to stay independent, so that their research and comments are not taken to be one party or the other. They are afraid that if they take money form the university or government or party they will be forced to dumb-down their criticism to satisfy their donors. They want to be able to say what they find or want to say without fear of having their funding cut (a very real possibility here). They are also trying hard not to be labeled in anyway. They want to keep it independent.
Thus, they haven’t attempted to gain money or support from the government or any student organizations (the Student Government in MK is apparently very different than in the US and “un-officially” sponsored by the government.
They want to start engaging younger students as many of the original editorial board members are leaving (aka graduating). The newspaper has had positive results and responses to their reports, but to get anyone to actually take responsibility for the organization will be difficult (and has been up until this point). When they distribute the newspaper, they do so both online and in person. Sometimes leaving it around university hot spots, or physically handing it to people.
Their goals for the future are to keep the newspaper open and sustainable. They want to expand to hosting events for students. They also want to help any student that comes to them with a workshop or help in applying for a project. They really want this to become a force for the students.
Showing posts with label Democracy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Democracy. Show all posts
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
All 4 Fair Trials
Back in Skopje, after a few weeks off from interviews, but working on writing the blog post you have been (enjoying) reading, I meet with All 4 Fair Trials. They are located in Skopje, right in the heart of downtown.
They were founded in 2003 as a coalition of NGOs across the country to fight corruption simply by observing and reporting. Their main activity is to monitor the courts, and see how well they follow procedure in prosecuting cases. They focus on the corruption in courts. As part of this observation, they have a sub focus on journalistic cases that focus on defamation and libel. They also have some other smaller projects.
At their own offices, there are currently 10 people who mostly have a law background. One has a sociological background, as well as a webmaster. The Coalition also has an executive board of 7 people.
Their funding mostly comes through foreign donations. (The US Embassy is the most stable funding source). They get some money from the MK government, but it was only for the trafficking case. It was the small (their word) amount of $7,000.
When asked if they work with the government, they stated that they do not work closely, due to their monitoring procedures. If they do work with some form of government, it is usually with judges or prosecutors who are active in the courtroom. They organize workshops for the people involved in court cases (not those being prosecuted.) They invite experts to lecture about international experience related to the law.
Since I do not know anything about the corruption or how bad it is in Macedonia, I asked them about corruption. They stated that after ethnic problems, corruption is the main problem. Especially for democracy, because corruption is deeply routed in all aspects of MK life. They gave examples of the emergency room, court, education, or university. All 4 Fair Trials follows all cases with a high level of possibility of corruption. They try to see how correctly the laws are followed.
They have 55 people who monitor cases on a voluntary basis. There is a questionnaire so that the monitoring is similar all across the country. They follow cases from day one in court to the final judgement. They specifically follow the case: what do the lawyers say? What are the other’s reactions? There are 75 questions to work with. They will then analyze the data and produce a report about the cases. They are currently producing a report on last year.
They (along with a lot of other NGOs) have given me some materials to read. If I have time (and I really hope I have time) I want to read these materials and analyze them for you all/myself.
They were founded in 2003 as a coalition of NGOs across the country to fight corruption simply by observing and reporting. Their main activity is to monitor the courts, and see how well they follow procedure in prosecuting cases. They focus on the corruption in courts. As part of this observation, they have a sub focus on journalistic cases that focus on defamation and libel. They also have some other smaller projects.
At their own offices, there are currently 10 people who mostly have a law background. One has a sociological background, as well as a webmaster. The Coalition also has an executive board of 7 people.
Their funding mostly comes through foreign donations. (The US Embassy is the most stable funding source). They get some money from the MK government, but it was only for the trafficking case. It was the small (their word) amount of $7,000.
When asked if they work with the government, they stated that they do not work closely, due to their monitoring procedures. If they do work with some form of government, it is usually with judges or prosecutors who are active in the courtroom. They organize workshops for the people involved in court cases (not those being prosecuted.) They invite experts to lecture about international experience related to the law.
Since I do not know anything about the corruption or how bad it is in Macedonia, I asked them about corruption. They stated that after ethnic problems, corruption is the main problem. Especially for democracy, because corruption is deeply routed in all aspects of MK life. They gave examples of the emergency room, court, education, or university. All 4 Fair Trials follows all cases with a high level of possibility of corruption. They try to see how correctly the laws are followed.
They have 55 people who monitor cases on a voluntary basis. There is a questionnaire so that the monitoring is similar all across the country. They follow cases from day one in court to the final judgement. They specifically follow the case: what do the lawyers say? What are the other’s reactions? There are 75 questions to work with. They will then analyze the data and produce a report about the cases. They are currently producing a report on last year.
They (along with a lot of other NGOs) have given me some materials to read. If I have time (and I really hope I have time) I want to read these materials and analyze them for you all/myself.
Monday, February 6, 2012
Youth Forum Bitola
My next meeting in Bitola was with Youth Forum. I do not have as much information about this NGO mainly because they were mostly uncooperative in the interview, in fact insulting myself and my research technique. They barely volunteered any information outside of a direct answer to my broad question.
Youth Forum began in 1999 by young people to meet the needs of the disadvantaged youth without an ability to express themselves artistically. It was very difficult to get started (finding office space mainly). They want to give information to young people about culture, arts, and the protection of human rights. They wanted to be able to give information that people would need when they need it. They are a grassroots organization, and claim, that their people are very enthusiastic. It was very difficult for them to implement any changes in the beginning, but now things are different. Some things can’t be helped, but the majority of the problems are with a lack of enthusiasm. Many people are depressed, and it is difficult to push for them to become more active. Especially with no cooperation from the municipal government.
They do most of their activism in Bitola, but some of there members also act as a journalist in other parts of MK. They began with a researching of problems in Bitola for the youth. The youth there are very diverse but many are interested in the same thing (such as theater and sports). Thus it became easy to direct them to create a play together, or play a game. And once you can bring them together, it is easier to share how similar people are. Some people still cause problems, but Youth Forum feels they are gaining ground.
Youth Forum sponsors shows, concerts and publishes a magazine. They have also completed two “docu-movies” about Bitola and the surrounding areas. They stated that it is very difficult to provide these services because the space for public theater is missing in Bitola. They want bigger support from foundations, donors, and other small NGOs.
There was more interest in the past, but now only a few connected people are interest. They feel like since there is no real violence going on now, no one is interested. Youth Forum likes to help the Roma, Albanian, and Turkish NGOs, but is afraid that they will collapse within the next few years. These NGOs need more support. There is really no ethnic violence now, there was violence in the past (particularly around 2001). According to Youth Forum, the Roma were really discriminated against with jobs that were really forbidden for them to enter. Some coffee bars refuse to serve the Roma. With no interest from the government, the discrimination continues.
They haven’t received national government funding but the municipality helps to cover the rent or electric bills. The Agency for Sports helps some, with $1000, but that allows some publications to be made. Mostly they receive foreign aid. Without this aid they wouldn’t be able to survive, some have been from local embassies.
Youth Forum would like to be able to work in the schools, but they are unable to do so. They do promote the EVS volunteering at local universities. Youth Forum is both a sending and receiving organization.
They are working closely with a new program “Open Municipality” that aims to make the municipality more open to the public.They cover the meeting of the local city council. Then they investigate how they work and publish the findings. They claim that their coverage is different than the local newspapers. They claim that the newspapers often just say “There was a meeting.”
They host 2-3 events a month and a few annual activities. They are trying to gain a interest from the community. They are always open to the community to discuss their work and plans. They have a lot of ongoing projects, including conferences and seminars. They try to do everything to benefit the youth. They have more than 100 members, but only 15 are generally active at one time on a certain project.
They have faced many problems in their years. According to Youth Forum, there is no mentality on volunteering, or thinking it is ok (they want jobs, and therefore shouldn’t volunteer). There is an NGO forum of civil organizations, but it doesn’t work properly. They try to help with minority NGOs, such as including them in the documentaries. Youth Forum was told to be quiet before the election, and they would receive cash after the election. No one reacted to Youth Forum going public with this information.
They also fight against the perception that the NGOs are created to cause the problems in society. The real problem is that the people spending the money are not receiving truthful or good reports. There are some NGOs who didn’t use the money correctly. In the past it was easier to gain funding, due to the Kosovo crisis. Some NGOs didn’t use the money correctly. They fight the perceptions by being diligent. According to them, the difficult problems are with personal mistakes, but most people have an agenda. Be it political basis or even “trying to help.” There were more integration with the NGOs, there wouldn’t be as many problems.
Youth Forum began in 1999 by young people to meet the needs of the disadvantaged youth without an ability to express themselves artistically. It was very difficult to get started (finding office space mainly). They want to give information to young people about culture, arts, and the protection of human rights. They wanted to be able to give information that people would need when they need it. They are a grassroots organization, and claim, that their people are very enthusiastic. It was very difficult for them to implement any changes in the beginning, but now things are different. Some things can’t be helped, but the majority of the problems are with a lack of enthusiasm. Many people are depressed, and it is difficult to push for them to become more active. Especially with no cooperation from the municipal government.
They do most of their activism in Bitola, but some of there members also act as a journalist in other parts of MK. They began with a researching of problems in Bitola for the youth. The youth there are very diverse but many are interested in the same thing (such as theater and sports). Thus it became easy to direct them to create a play together, or play a game. And once you can bring them together, it is easier to share how similar people are. Some people still cause problems, but Youth Forum feels they are gaining ground.
Youth Forum sponsors shows, concerts and publishes a magazine. They have also completed two “docu-movies” about Bitola and the surrounding areas. They stated that it is very difficult to provide these services because the space for public theater is missing in Bitola. They want bigger support from foundations, donors, and other small NGOs.
There was more interest in the past, but now only a few connected people are interest. They feel like since there is no real violence going on now, no one is interested. Youth Forum likes to help the Roma, Albanian, and Turkish NGOs, but is afraid that they will collapse within the next few years. These NGOs need more support. There is really no ethnic violence now, there was violence in the past (particularly around 2001). According to Youth Forum, the Roma were really discriminated against with jobs that were really forbidden for them to enter. Some coffee bars refuse to serve the Roma. With no interest from the government, the discrimination continues.
They haven’t received national government funding but the municipality helps to cover the rent or electric bills. The Agency for Sports helps some, with $1000, but that allows some publications to be made. Mostly they receive foreign aid. Without this aid they wouldn’t be able to survive, some have been from local embassies.
Youth Forum would like to be able to work in the schools, but they are unable to do so. They do promote the EVS volunteering at local universities. Youth Forum is both a sending and receiving organization.
They are working closely with a new program “Open Municipality” that aims to make the municipality more open to the public.They cover the meeting of the local city council. Then they investigate how they work and publish the findings. They claim that their coverage is different than the local newspapers. They claim that the newspapers often just say “There was a meeting.”
They host 2-3 events a month and a few annual activities. They are trying to gain a interest from the community. They are always open to the community to discuss their work and plans. They have a lot of ongoing projects, including conferences and seminars. They try to do everything to benefit the youth. They have more than 100 members, but only 15 are generally active at one time on a certain project.
They have faced many problems in their years. According to Youth Forum, there is no mentality on volunteering, or thinking it is ok (they want jobs, and therefore shouldn’t volunteer). There is an NGO forum of civil organizations, but it doesn’t work properly. They try to help with minority NGOs, such as including them in the documentaries. Youth Forum was told to be quiet before the election, and they would receive cash after the election. No one reacted to Youth Forum going public with this information.
They also fight against the perception that the NGOs are created to cause the problems in society. The real problem is that the people spending the money are not receiving truthful or good reports. There are some NGOs who didn’t use the money correctly. In the past it was easier to gain funding, due to the Kosovo crisis. Some NGOs didn’t use the money correctly. They fight the perceptions by being diligent. According to them, the difficult problems are with personal mistakes, but most people have an agenda. Be it political basis or even “trying to help.” There were more integration with the NGOs, there wouldn’t be as many problems.
Sunday, January 29, 2012
Meeting with a Contact
While there are technically three guys who work at Florozon, I had only met one of them once at the workshop they hosted. I was able to set up a meeting with him to see his views of the NGO sector. He has worked since 1994 in the civil society sector, and since 1998 with NGOs specifically. Many of the views stated below are his, and just give another perspective to the debate.
He said that the sector has changed in the last five years in a positive sense. In the post-conflict society, there was some activism, mostly in youth organizations. The organizations were mostly with sports, schools, labor unions. In the beginning of transnational period, there was additional input from external sources. They began activism with issues of the environment, humanitarian aid connected to the Balkan wars. After 2001, there were organizations who dealt with peace issues and human rights. During their unlucky circumstances, it developed positively.
The problem with civil society in Macedonia, according to him, is that they mainly lack activism. Most NGOs are not member based or financed well. The knowledge and skills of NGO workers are still in development. Many people are not involved in civil society due to their fear of the government. there were some attempts to work critically against the government, but they were often “neutralized immediately.” Some of the attempts were shut down discreetly by discrediting the organizations or threatening the people who work there with jail.
When I asked if there was cooperation with the government, and he commented that there is some. Int he transition, the government didn’t see the benefit of civil society. Soon they realized the power that civil society had and wanted to be involved. Sometimes it is called the 5th sector, and the government tries to discredit NGOs as working for foreign agencies as spies. The political party with power is dealing with establishing small satellites all over the country (the NGOGOs). However, cooperation exists with a lot of analysis on who and why. The EU is pushing for cooperation especially in UNDP. There are areas where the government has no experience, and he thinks that NGOs can help in this area.
My contact is currently working in the government helping them to implement affirmative action. “No matter what, the government should cooperate to better serve.” He is helping the government to try to link projects to have a better impact. The municipalities have responded favorable to the linkage. They are trying a mediation in schools as well. He wants better cooperation so there is a better institutionalization of the cooperation. He has worked with ‘teaching the teacher’ to reteach for more mediation between different groups, if the government doesn’t like anything they can just forget.
Financially, there are some connections between the government and NGOs. There is funding from casinos and the lottery. There are yearly bases, but they only give money to ‘their’ NGOs. There are special funds for NGOs, but there is a lot of criticism. When the government changes (as in the party changes), the list of recipients changes. If cooperation doesn’t go well, they will loose the money. Many NGOs have never asked for money, because they don’t want the money from the government. Many feel that it lacks impartially. It is seen as corrupted if they take the money; however, if there was a separate organization, they feel it would be corrupted too. Money often comes from international organizations and bilateral agreements.
For cooperation with the municipality, it depends on the individual municipalities. Some municipalities still want NGOs to be obedient. If the municipalities see the NGOs as having some power- they want to work with them. The municipalities will also work closer if the NGO is connected internationally. Sometimes municipalities support small NGOs or smaller projects by NGOs.
The biggest organizations are focused in Skopje, where there is a higher concentration of money. A few have tried to decentralize from Skopje, but most are still there. There is rarely any high profile organizations or money in the non-capital cities.
The current NGOs focus mostly on peace building. They might be dealing with the past and conflict management or the “burning issues” (more ad-hoc intervention, monuments, identity issues, etc.). Some of the more successful ones focus on youth leadership and identification of potential leaders. Since 2001, most have focused on inter-ethnic cooperation. Many have targeted secondary schools and the youth. Some do this by teaching the directors and teachers of schools other by reaching out to the students. Some organizations want to better teach the OFA an related issues, others focus more on the environment.
This meeting went very well for such a short meeting, he offered to give me some contact information to other NGOs.
He said that the sector has changed in the last five years in a positive sense. In the post-conflict society, there was some activism, mostly in youth organizations. The organizations were mostly with sports, schools, labor unions. In the beginning of transnational period, there was additional input from external sources. They began activism with issues of the environment, humanitarian aid connected to the Balkan wars. After 2001, there were organizations who dealt with peace issues and human rights. During their unlucky circumstances, it developed positively.
The problem with civil society in Macedonia, according to him, is that they mainly lack activism. Most NGOs are not member based or financed well. The knowledge and skills of NGO workers are still in development. Many people are not involved in civil society due to their fear of the government. there were some attempts to work critically against the government, but they were often “neutralized immediately.” Some of the attempts were shut down discreetly by discrediting the organizations or threatening the people who work there with jail.
When I asked if there was cooperation with the government, and he commented that there is some. Int he transition, the government didn’t see the benefit of civil society. Soon they realized the power that civil society had and wanted to be involved. Sometimes it is called the 5th sector, and the government tries to discredit NGOs as working for foreign agencies as spies. The political party with power is dealing with establishing small satellites all over the country (the NGOGOs). However, cooperation exists with a lot of analysis on who and why. The EU is pushing for cooperation especially in UNDP. There are areas where the government has no experience, and he thinks that NGOs can help in this area.
My contact is currently working in the government helping them to implement affirmative action. “No matter what, the government should cooperate to better serve.” He is helping the government to try to link projects to have a better impact. The municipalities have responded favorable to the linkage. They are trying a mediation in schools as well. He wants better cooperation so there is a better institutionalization of the cooperation. He has worked with ‘teaching the teacher’ to reteach for more mediation between different groups, if the government doesn’t like anything they can just forget.
Financially, there are some connections between the government and NGOs. There is funding from casinos and the lottery. There are yearly bases, but they only give money to ‘their’ NGOs. There are special funds for NGOs, but there is a lot of criticism. When the government changes (as in the party changes), the list of recipients changes. If cooperation doesn’t go well, they will loose the money. Many NGOs have never asked for money, because they don’t want the money from the government. Many feel that it lacks impartially. It is seen as corrupted if they take the money; however, if there was a separate organization, they feel it would be corrupted too. Money often comes from international organizations and bilateral agreements.
For cooperation with the municipality, it depends on the individual municipalities. Some municipalities still want NGOs to be obedient. If the municipalities see the NGOs as having some power- they want to work with them. The municipalities will also work closer if the NGO is connected internationally. Sometimes municipalities support small NGOs or smaller projects by NGOs.
The biggest organizations are focused in Skopje, where there is a higher concentration of money. A few have tried to decentralize from Skopje, but most are still there. There is rarely any high profile organizations or money in the non-capital cities.
The current NGOs focus mostly on peace building. They might be dealing with the past and conflict management or the “burning issues” (more ad-hoc intervention, monuments, identity issues, etc.). Some of the more successful ones focus on youth leadership and identification of potential leaders. Since 2001, most have focused on inter-ethnic cooperation. Many have targeted secondary schools and the youth. Some do this by teaching the directors and teachers of schools other by reaching out to the students. Some organizations want to better teach the OFA an related issues, others focus more on the environment.
This meeting went very well for such a short meeting, he offered to give me some contact information to other NGOs.
Tuesday, December 27, 2011
SOZM
I was finally able to meet with another women’s rights organization for my next meeting. SOZM or the National Council for Gender Equality (НСЖМ), is an NGO located in Skopje focusing on domestic violence. They had the smallest office I have yet seen. They had some room that was at most 10 feet long and 5 feet across. They fit about 5-7 people in this office at the time I was there. It was very disorganized- papers and books everywhere, but they were in the middle of a campaign. This was my shortest interview, because they had allotted less than one hour for our meeting. Also, they were very busy at this time.
This interview took place through a translator, because the head of the organization didn’t speak English, however, some of the information I got from the lady who translated. She also worked there and was not just a translator.
After the “reorganization” of Macedonia in 1991, they created the organization in Skopje and a few in other towns. They hosted humanitarian and peace events across the country. About 4 years later, there were 13 different women’s organizations in a network for international women’s rights.
Back then, many women were not involved in political activity. From the first and second parliamentary elections only 4 or 5 of the 120 members were women. The Reason for this, according to SOZM, was the parties themselves. They didn’t have women in the parties, they saw no need at first. This was one of their first goals- to get more women involved in politics. This was one reason for the establishment of their NGO- they saw this as a channel for social activity.
Using the political empowerment of women as the jumping board, they went as network throughout MK. All the different organizations completed independent activities but shared a common vision.
The government is supposed to support local women organizations and build their capacity. In 2011, there are 110 local independent organizations in the network that SOZM is a part of. They are the result of organizations acting as a network to promote the interests of women. Outside of the network, there are 200 other independent local women’s organizations The NGO sector outside of Skopje is not very active, nor visible. But there are a few NGOs that are very active.
SOZM works with the government and the municipalities, but mostly with the municipalities. They have no problem working with the government. They work closely with the local government, but it is “a different story” when working with the national government. Every time they approach the national government the situation is different. The national government is fine to work with, but just not good for money. They have not received funding from the government for over 5 years; what funding they did get, was very minimal. All the funding comes from international donors. There is more money coming from the national government in the future. After MK became a Candidate Country, there was less funding available to NGOs in MK. In the future, they want to their use of international donors. While many of the people active in their organization are volunteers, they need funds to pay for their office space and main activities.
They work towards fighting the perception of opposition NGOs. They admit there are some NGOGOs and ones that are specifically one party or the other, but not all are. SOZM claims that not very many organizations are perceived this way. They did not elaborate.
While they mainly focus on violence now, they want to branch out to focus on economic and political issues. They do not yet have the funds to realize these goals yet.
SOZM provides a SOS line in three different mobile numbers, so it is no charge to the victims. They are able to reach someone to talk about their problems. Then the women who call will be refereed to other organizations for shelters, legal aid, etc. They can also be advised on their legal rights. They also have an intervention center. You can stay there for 24 to 48 hours before you have to move. The center provides accommodation and food for the women. Outside of Skopje other organizations provide the same services within the network or women's organizations. They promote the call lines and shelters on local media, leaflets, etc. They even organized a round table with the stakeholders when the lines first became active.
They probably serve about 80 women monthly.
They also focus on the economic empowerment of women. They provide English and computer courses. They will train women how to start their own businesses. Or how to expand a current business. There is also a program for peace and conflict resolution that they work with. They promote the UN Resolution 1325. Towards increasing the participation of women in politics/democracy, their input for decision making, peace and in upper levels in the police and army.
Sunday, December 18, 2011
Civil Society Institute
(Not to sound like a broken record, but..) My next meeting was with Center for Civic Initiative (CCI). CCI has been in operation for 15 years. They have had great success with local reform with two different political parties in power. And to put it lightly, they made me actually feel important. It started with a car to pick me up in Skopje rather than taking the bus (which I was willing and able to do and even tried to convince them that I should do). Then I was taken out to lunch and dropped off in front of my friend’s apartment! And they were super super nice, some of the nicest people I have met yet and they were willing to help!
Once I arrived in Prilep, where their NGO is located, we immediately started talking about them! Their office is near the center, but still on the outskirts of town. They have three rooms, a reception area, small kitchen, and bathroom. And the rooms were very full of furniture or books! I will try my best to organize this interview, but we jumped all over the place with questions and answers!
The civil society sector in MK, according to them, is highly dependant upon donors. The different NGOs fight for the same idea, but with such small funding sources, they compete for people and money. There are a large number of NGOs registered, but many are no longer practicing. Former ministers often see the civil society as a place to retire into- and they create their own special NGO just for them. There are a few more NGOs than the normally accepted one that could be recognized, but there are not any watchdog organizations or any constructive critics. Many NGOS will not be politicized, or rather they will not join any parties or be associated with any political party. This way people will not see the NGOs actions as politicized. If they are seen as neutral then their funding doesn’t depend on whatever party is in power.
CCI tries to have a relationship with the entity and not the people in the positions. They partner with the local government, and are now in the position that they can ask them to try new ways of working without having to work for the party in the elections. In the last 2 years the local and national government and the NGOGOs have fostered a division of NGOs into the Soros NGOs and other NGOs. They tried to create the public opinion that the Soros NGOs are trying to make the country weak intentionally. Some of the people in government see enemies in the NGO/civil society sector because the government people think NGOs are trying to take over their jobs. There is now closer cooperation between the NGOs, partly because they are afraid of taking any action that may cause problems for them in the future. Now you can see NGOs working with the government without criticism from the public. Yet, they are working as a passive NGO sector. No one stood up in Feburary when ethnic tensions rose due to the conflict over the museum shaped as a church in the fortress in Skopje, because this was rather risky. The NGO sector is working as a passive sector right now- no one stands up when things are going badly, because they are afraid of the risks. They are happy that there is an NGO sector. They told me that “Our main concern is that we are lacking a strong partnership between NGOs.” There is no union of NGOs nor is there any cooperation. They even claim there there is no sense of working together because it is extremely difficult to get people to work together- make the meetings or phone calls. When asked why- they admitted that there is a known need, but there are some that disagree that there is a need. There is also a lack of effective action towards NGOs. If the NGOs are acting alone, then there is the idea that they are easy to eliminate, but if there is a network of NGOs trying to work together then the government would be more responsive. They work mostly for their own community rather than the greater community of the nation.
For 15 years there has not been a very active NGO sector. From 1999-2001 a lot of money came into MK due to the different conflicts. Many new NGOs were formed to take this easy money without learning how to write good grant proposals or continue the activities after the easy money was gone. Now CCI tries to get the funds and then implement more locally, often through re-granting procedures, the programs to help local people. Some NGOs are afraid to take action because it may cause problems with the government or local authorities. However, you can see NGOs working with the government with out criticism.
CCI feels that protecting human rights isn’t just the responsibility of the government, but also of the NGO sector. The government claims it is working with grassroots organizations, but this is just an excuse for not being active in critical areas, CCI believes. They even emphasized that it is more true now than before because MK is on the edge of a crisis. No community member or government employee is trying to imitate dialog between the government and the opposition or the ethnic groups of MK. They see no other option but for the NGO/civil society sector to step up and help bring the sides together.
CCICCI is trying to make changes through constructive cooperation and showing them it is important through their work with the kids. As long as they are putting topics that bring reform on the agenda, but that do not criticise the government then it is OK to propose them. The reforms need to be satisfying to both sides; often that means focusing on women’s rights, handicapped people, and human trafficking.
The government has helped create the idea in public that if you criticize the government then you are part of the opposition. There is no ‘mature-ness’ about democracy, according to CCI. The previous government/leaders are the ones who have changed it. There is a greater fear of obstacles, more personal power tendencies, and a lack of democratic experiences. While NGOs are making study visits to see how democracy is functioning in other countries, the government officials are not. Everyone is waiting for others to initiate a network rather than being the ones to initiate the network. That NGO that starts it will have the focus of the government (and it is implied the criticism). But waiting for other to act, CCI states, creates a dark atmosphere for NGOs; soon reality will force them to act with democracy.
CCI was began in 1997. They work with human rights/democracy, capacity building for the NGO sector, and the improvement public sector. They mostly focus on human rights/democracy. They began with refugee education, teaching kids so they didn’t loose their place in school. They helped form children/youth centers around MK. They offered classes and clubs in English Language, debate, theater, social skills, IT. The groups would have some focus on human rights and equality. Many kids were targeted through these extra-curricular activities. Then a different agency took over the camps, and some still function today but CCI does not run them.
After the camps, CCI focused on institutional development and capacity building. They did different studies on how to run an NGO. They received funding to build their own NGO up so they could help others. They want to share their experience and help with deeper cooperation. From the funding that they received to capacity build they also learned the “zig-zag” process. This process states that they go to the community and learn their needs. Then they go back to the board to create a program. When they have an idea, they go back to the community to implement to project.
They have over 80 implemented projects. They have discussed needs with different NGOs. They also deliver training to other NGOs and organizations. They will often give the new NGOs support, they monitor the implementations and assess their success. They believe that this could be applied to all sectors of governmental work. They have a big involvement in the beginning of new NGOs they fund. They have been granted money and through a process of re-granting they have helped over 30 other NGOs (such water meters, healthy, violence) all in the Prelip region. This re-granting has helped their reputation.
Another thing that CCI helps in providing legal aid to victims of human rights violations. They hired a lawyer to provide legal advice on domestic violence or work violations. This is still required in today’s climates, people come to complain to them almost every day. Since 2004 they focus on police violence. Now the lawyer is an internal asset to CCI rather than an external collaborator. Through cooperation with NGOs in Kumanovo, Strumitca, and Skopje all under the coordination of the Skopje organization this way they have almost the entire country covered.
Another thing they work on is prevention of human trafficking by training in schools and in the center of social care. They have developed teacher manuals and tested them in schools. They have lobbied to have the manuals adopted, but so far they have not been successful. MK is both a transit (girls are passed through MK) as well as an origin company (girls originate in MK). They are trying to make people more aware about the problem and what they can do to stop it. Most people who are responsible for the origin are members of the girls family. Most girls are traded for sex and are minors. Human trafficking needs to be recognized, and reported in especially in some areas. Part of the difficulties is the lack of knowledge. The government has called for proposals, but only certain NGOs get money from the government. There is some public perception of human trafficking but it needs more PR to have a higher awareness.
They also work on public administration a bit. They have an office in the municipality to help people become familiar with the NGO sector. They use this mainly to work with the the municipality on the NGO sector. They are working with neighborhood units so they can decide that their needs are locally rather than national government decided. There are 16 communities in the Prilep area. The neighborhoods are able to promote their positions in the municipalities. They are not asking for individual needs but rather the neighborhood action. They are trying to implement these in other countries or municipalities. The neighborhood units are a potential civil society outreach, but they need minimum funds to support volunteerism and lobby for the community.
They have received funding from many foreign donors, such as the US, EU, and individual organizations. However, they have never received funding from the MK government. CCI has applied but there is a very selective approach to who gets the MK funds. While they do not receive monetary funding, the government helps them out non-financially. There is great cooperation between the ministry of education , ombudsman, justice and the interior. Most NGOs have problems with funding a few have received funding through the EU as well as the US. This funding is mostly to new or different NGOs.
Once I arrived in Prilep, where their NGO is located, we immediately started talking about them! Their office is near the center, but still on the outskirts of town. They have three rooms, a reception area, small kitchen, and bathroom. And the rooms were very full of furniture or books! I will try my best to organize this interview, but we jumped all over the place with questions and answers!
The civil society sector in MK, according to them, is highly dependant upon donors. The different NGOs fight for the same idea, but with such small funding sources, they compete for people and money. There are a large number of NGOs registered, but many are no longer practicing. Former ministers often see the civil society as a place to retire into- and they create their own special NGO just for them. There are a few more NGOs than the normally accepted one that could be recognized, but there are not any watchdog organizations or any constructive critics. Many NGOS will not be politicized, or rather they will not join any parties or be associated with any political party. This way people will not see the NGOs actions as politicized. If they are seen as neutral then their funding doesn’t depend on whatever party is in power.
CCI tries to have a relationship with the entity and not the people in the positions. They partner with the local government, and are now in the position that they can ask them to try new ways of working without having to work for the party in the elections. In the last 2 years the local and national government and the NGOGOs have fostered a division of NGOs into the Soros NGOs and other NGOs. They tried to create the public opinion that the Soros NGOs are trying to make the country weak intentionally. Some of the people in government see enemies in the NGO/civil society sector because the government people think NGOs are trying to take over their jobs. There is now closer cooperation between the NGOs, partly because they are afraid of taking any action that may cause problems for them in the future. Now you can see NGOs working with the government without criticism from the public. Yet, they are working as a passive NGO sector. No one stood up in Feburary when ethnic tensions rose due to the conflict over the museum shaped as a church in the fortress in Skopje, because this was rather risky. The NGO sector is working as a passive sector right now- no one stands up when things are going badly, because they are afraid of the risks. They are happy that there is an NGO sector. They told me that “Our main concern is that we are lacking a strong partnership between NGOs.” There is no union of NGOs nor is there any cooperation. They even claim there there is no sense of working together because it is extremely difficult to get people to work together- make the meetings or phone calls. When asked why- they admitted that there is a known need, but there are some that disagree that there is a need. There is also a lack of effective action towards NGOs. If the NGOs are acting alone, then there is the idea that they are easy to eliminate, but if there is a network of NGOs trying to work together then the government would be more responsive. They work mostly for their own community rather than the greater community of the nation.
For 15 years there has not been a very active NGO sector. From 1999-2001 a lot of money came into MK due to the different conflicts. Many new NGOs were formed to take this easy money without learning how to write good grant proposals or continue the activities after the easy money was gone. Now CCI tries to get the funds and then implement more locally, often through re-granting procedures, the programs to help local people. Some NGOs are afraid to take action because it may cause problems with the government or local authorities. However, you can see NGOs working with the government with out criticism.
CCI feels that protecting human rights isn’t just the responsibility of the government, but also of the NGO sector. The government claims it is working with grassroots organizations, but this is just an excuse for not being active in critical areas, CCI believes. They even emphasized that it is more true now than before because MK is on the edge of a crisis. No community member or government employee is trying to imitate dialog between the government and the opposition or the ethnic groups of MK. They see no other option but for the NGO/civil society sector to step up and help bring the sides together.
CCICCI is trying to make changes through constructive cooperation and showing them it is important through their work with the kids. As long as they are putting topics that bring reform on the agenda, but that do not criticise the government then it is OK to propose them. The reforms need to be satisfying to both sides; often that means focusing on women’s rights, handicapped people, and human trafficking.
The government has helped create the idea in public that if you criticize the government then you are part of the opposition. There is no ‘mature-ness’ about democracy, according to CCI. The previous government/leaders are the ones who have changed it. There is a greater fear of obstacles, more personal power tendencies, and a lack of democratic experiences. While NGOs are making study visits to see how democracy is functioning in other countries, the government officials are not. Everyone is waiting for others to initiate a network rather than being the ones to initiate the network. That NGO that starts it will have the focus of the government (and it is implied the criticism). But waiting for other to act, CCI states, creates a dark atmosphere for NGOs; soon reality will force them to act with democracy.
CCI was began in 1997. They work with human rights/democracy, capacity building for the NGO sector, and the improvement public sector. They mostly focus on human rights/democracy. They began with refugee education, teaching kids so they didn’t loose their place in school. They helped form children/youth centers around MK. They offered classes and clubs in English Language, debate, theater, social skills, IT. The groups would have some focus on human rights and equality. Many kids were targeted through these extra-curricular activities. Then a different agency took over the camps, and some still function today but CCI does not run them.
After the camps, CCI focused on institutional development and capacity building. They did different studies on how to run an NGO. They received funding to build their own NGO up so they could help others. They want to share their experience and help with deeper cooperation. From the funding that they received to capacity build they also learned the “zig-zag” process. This process states that they go to the community and learn their needs. Then they go back to the board to create a program. When they have an idea, they go back to the community to implement to project.
They have over 80 implemented projects. They have discussed needs with different NGOs. They also deliver training to other NGOs and organizations. They will often give the new NGOs support, they monitor the implementations and assess their success. They believe that this could be applied to all sectors of governmental work. They have a big involvement in the beginning of new NGOs they fund. They have been granted money and through a process of re-granting they have helped over 30 other NGOs (such water meters, healthy, violence) all in the Prelip region. This re-granting has helped their reputation.
Another thing that CCI helps in providing legal aid to victims of human rights violations. They hired a lawyer to provide legal advice on domestic violence or work violations. This is still required in today’s climates, people come to complain to them almost every day. Since 2004 they focus on police violence. Now the lawyer is an internal asset to CCI rather than an external collaborator. Through cooperation with NGOs in Kumanovo, Strumitca, and Skopje all under the coordination of the Skopje organization this way they have almost the entire country covered.
Another thing they work on is prevention of human trafficking by training in schools and in the center of social care. They have developed teacher manuals and tested them in schools. They have lobbied to have the manuals adopted, but so far they have not been successful. MK is both a transit (girls are passed through MK) as well as an origin company (girls originate in MK). They are trying to make people more aware about the problem and what they can do to stop it. Most people who are responsible for the origin are members of the girls family. Most girls are traded for sex and are minors. Human trafficking needs to be recognized, and reported in especially in some areas. Part of the difficulties is the lack of knowledge. The government has called for proposals, but only certain NGOs get money from the government. There is some public perception of human trafficking but it needs more PR to have a higher awareness.
They also work on public administration a bit. They have an office in the municipality to help people become familiar with the NGO sector. They use this mainly to work with the the municipality on the NGO sector. They are working with neighborhood units so they can decide that their needs are locally rather than national government decided. There are 16 communities in the Prilep area. The neighborhoods are able to promote their positions in the municipalities. They are not asking for individual needs but rather the neighborhood action. They are trying to implement these in other countries or municipalities. The neighborhood units are a potential civil society outreach, but they need minimum funds to support volunteerism and lobby for the community.
They have received funding from many foreign donors, such as the US, EU, and individual organizations. However, they have never received funding from the MK government. CCI has applied but there is a very selective approach to who gets the MK funds. While they do not receive monetary funding, the government helps them out non-financially. There is great cooperation between the ministry of education , ombudsman, justice and the interior. Most NGOs have problems with funding a few have received funding through the EU as well as the US. This funding is mostly to new or different NGOs.
Thursday, November 17, 2011
LOJA in Tetovo
My next meeting was with LOJA in Tetovo. They were having a German Film fest and invited me to watch the film fest as well as interview them. Loja mean games in Albanian, and traces it back to how their NGO got started. Essentially they help with video production for cross cultural discussion. There are 7 people who work at the NGO, 5 of who are local in Tetovo, and one is from Germany (not sure who the other person is, just realized that it only added up to six).
In 1999, while they were directing and rehearsing a play and they could see all of the refugees from the Kosovo crisis. (Need some reminding on what exactly happened? Click here.) The people who later formed LOJA, decided to become involved and to do something for the kids who were suffering. They were playing games to help the kids forget what they had seen. After the refugee camp was moved, they decided to continue the work. They were being told that there was peace, but the founders kept seeing a different story on the ground. They wanted to help prevent a crisis situation from developing. So they decided to create an NGO to help maintain the change. In 2001, they felt the changes in the ethnic group before the tension escalated. Their target community is the youth, because they are easier to change when shown the benefits of cooperation. Where LOJA is known (such as in Tetovo) the community is very responsive to their efforts, but they face resistance from other communities.
From 2000-2004 they worked on the Babylon projects, whom they shared office space with.These were the first attempts in non-formal intervention. It is different in a post-conflict society than a society before the conflict. They are trying to reach their aims and help groups be resistant to extremists. But their work can be destroyed within hours. They are trying to give messages that will stick through and after the fights that people are going to have. They try to bring people together who share things in common, rather than what separates them. (They are teachers/journalists/workers rather than Albanian or Macedonian.) Part of this cooperation involved creating the following video:
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/r3muc80-Poo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Currently, they run 4-5 projects per month and are the only ethnically mixed organization in MK. There are other organizations that have both ethnicity’s (or all) but they are either All Albanians or Macedonians in higher positions, with the opposite in lower positions. At LOJA both Macedonians and Albanians are equal. They work mainly with culture. When I talked to them in October, they had 4 projects they were working on:
- extra-circular activities for future teachers. This one has been running for 4 years. They provide training and direct workshops. LOJA also runs small pilot projects with different ethnic groups.
- Robert Bauch Tifgen (possible spelling errors, because I could not find anything related to many different spellings of this name) cultural activities, such as with the media to try to create different resources.
- Franco-German youth exchange as a resource center for South Eastern Europe
- In cooperation with a Swiss group- network of participation with cultural memories. To provide different perceptions of history. Bring reasons why to cooperate and to do so through art.
LOJA is often critical towards the governments view of civil society (in this case, I mean the real government not the party in power). Mike (my contact) believes that it is more complicated due to the mixed groups, than the government gives on. There is a difference between the government’s discourse vs. the actuality on the ground. The government/party in power believes that if you are not for this particular government, then you are against it.
LOJA has never gotten any money from the government, and they are dependent on external funds. They are now able to self finance. They often offer training abroad for training (and they get some extra salary out of it). They have been working in the public sector for 9 years, yet they are the only cinema in Tetovo. There is no public cinema in Tetovo. In addition, the government is in charge of cleaning up the trash on the streets. (In MK, they have big trash containers on the street and everyone brings their trash to these like they would a big dumpster in the US. Sometimes these are over-flowing.) Right in front of LOJA, there is one of these set of trash cans. Usually it is over flowing, and they do not clean it up until the day after any LOJA event. LOJA thinks this is on purpose.
There are no big cultural events in Tetovo, none sponsored by the municipality even with partial support. When the municipality does support something, no one sees where it goes, it is suggested that sometimes that it lines the pockets of the officials, or fictive projects. Mike states that the government is discriminatory towards non ethnic Macedonians. The state will enforce laws, only the negative ones. Mike claims that the government needs external support to change the laws and how they are enforced. Further, Mike claims, the government is doing very little to help bridge the gap ethnicities, sometimes they even cause the problems. Thus, this part of the government’s job is left in the hands of civil society and international organizations.
When the 2001 crisis occurred, the Ohrid agreement ignored the basic problems. The current government, Mike alleges, will miss the opportunity afforded by this agreement if they continue on the same path. While in theory, the framework has been implemented, the policing infrastructure has not been fully changed due to problems in finances.
After the interview, we attended a movie event sponsored by the German Embassy. It was the first movie of the week long event. They had translated the German into both Albanian and Macedonian. They also had the German Ambassador’s speech translated by different women into both Albanian and Macedonian. They are very careful to have both ethnicities represented. After the movie, they had a small reception with food and juice provided. Many people mingled, but it did appear that they were in separate friend groups.
“My fear,” Mike finished with, “intuition, suspicion tells me that this government will break Macedonia so it makes no sense.”
Monday, October 31, 2011
Civil Society and Citizenship
Now we turn to more of the research I began about the civil society sector! I know it took awhile, but remember at first I wanted to focus on the women’s NGOs, so this would have been background to a women’s rights focus. That or I probably didn’t discover the book until later. I find it best to start off with a definition of civil society, for I find it is hard to explain to those who are not sure what it is already. I often find myself relying on examples alone. “You know The Red Cross? Amnesty International? National Organization of Women? THOSE are NGOs.” In comes Lester Salamon with the save: “they are all organizations that operate outside the state apparatus, that do not distribute profits, and that citizens are free to join or not join to pursue common purposes” (Salamon et al, xvii). In addition there are 5 characteristics that are required of civil society organizations (Salamon et al, 3-4):
The importance of the civil society sector has began to be seen as “strategically important participants in this search for a ‘middle way’ between sole reliance on the market and sole reliance on the state that now seems to be increasingly underway” (Salomon et al, 5). There is a general acceptance that the government can not serve all of the needs of its citizens, thus the civil society sector is beginning to bridge that gap between public and private services. The civil society sector is also considered a critical part of a democratic society.
Part of being part of a member of a democratic society is the right of citizenship. Citizenship can define “the limits of state power and where a civil society or the private sphere of free individuals begin” (Yuval-Davis & Werbner, 2). In fact, democratic citizenship maintains the right to be different. Yet, while allowing different parties to emerge, and being a part of the nation, each person has a different view of citizenship because citizenship encapsulates specific, historically inflected, cultural and social assumptions about similarity and difference” (Yuval-Davis & Werber, 3). Further, Yuval-Davis and Werber argue that citizenship is at the intersection of the state, civil society and an individual intersect.
But for me? The best quote I have found is this: Unlike nationalism, which grounds itself in past myths of common origin or culture, citizenship raises its eyes towards the future to common destinies” (Yuval-Davis & Werber, 8).
Nira Yuval-Davis & Pnina Werbner, “Women & the New Discourse of Citizenship,” in Women, Citizen & Difference, 1-38, ed by Nira Yuval-Davis and Prina Werber. London: Zed Books, 1999.
global Civil Society Dimensions of the Non-Profit sector, ed Lester Slamon, Helmut Anheier, Regina List, Stefan Toepler, S. Wojciech Sokolowski and Associates. Baltimore: The John Hopkins Center for Civil Society Studies, 1999.
“Preface”
“Civil Society in Comparitive Perspective” 3-39
- organizations: they have an institutional presence and structure
- private: they are institutions separate from the state.
- non-profit distributing: they do not return profits to their managers or to a set of owners
- self governing: they are fundamentally in control of their own affairs
- voluntary: membership in them is not legally required and they attract some level of voluntary contribution of time or money
The importance of the civil society sector has began to be seen as “strategically important participants in this search for a ‘middle way’ between sole reliance on the market and sole reliance on the state that now seems to be increasingly underway” (Salomon et al, 5). There is a general acceptance that the government can not serve all of the needs of its citizens, thus the civil society sector is beginning to bridge that gap between public and private services. The civil society sector is also considered a critical part of a democratic society.
Part of being part of a member of a democratic society is the right of citizenship. Citizenship can define “the limits of state power and where a civil society or the private sphere of free individuals begin” (Yuval-Davis & Werbner, 2). In fact, democratic citizenship maintains the right to be different. Yet, while allowing different parties to emerge, and being a part of the nation, each person has a different view of citizenship because citizenship encapsulates specific, historically inflected, cultural and social assumptions about similarity and difference” (Yuval-Davis & Werber, 3). Further, Yuval-Davis and Werber argue that citizenship is at the intersection of the state, civil society and an individual intersect.
But for me? The best quote I have found is this: Unlike nationalism, which grounds itself in past myths of common origin or culture, citizenship raises its eyes towards the future to common destinies” (Yuval-Davis & Werber, 8).
Nira Yuval-Davis & Pnina Werbner, “Women & the New Discourse of Citizenship,” in Women, Citizen & Difference, 1-38, ed by Nira Yuval-Davis and Prina Werber. London: Zed Books, 1999.
global Civil Society Dimensions of the Non-Profit sector, ed Lester Slamon, Helmut Anheier, Regina List, Stefan Toepler, S. Wojciech Sokolowski and Associates. Baltimore: The John Hopkins Center for Civil Society Studies, 1999.
“Preface”
“Civil Society in Comparitive Perspective” 3-39
Friday, October 28, 2011
Intersecton of gender and The State
The book Gender, Politics and the State edited by Vicky Randall and Georgina Waylan is aptly named. Most articles connect the three and how they interact with each other. Yet, we as readers and thinkers need to understand that you cannot analyze women and/in politics without both understanding the structures that constrain choices that individual women make and impact that other choices have on the state and those structures (Waylan, 2). In addition, often times we refer to “the state” or “the government” without realizing that they are not “a unitary structure but a differentiated set of institutions, agencies and discourses, and the product of a particular historical and political conjuncture” (Waylan, 7). Waylan concludes that thus, the state (and its gender policies) are a reflection of the society that built it as well as the society that is currently using it (7).
There are three ways that the state implements policies towards women
These discussions are important to keep in mind as I switch to the interaction between sex and the state. A helpful definition of the modern European state is one that has the “power which claims the supreme right to make and enforce rules for all the inhabitants of a given territory” (Vogel, 32). In addition, “the state serves to establish a legal order capable of enforcing the peaceful coexistence and cooperation among individuals” (Vogel, 32). A being part of a modern state, an important concept is citizenship. Citizenship “provides a major link between states, individuals and collectives” (Waylan, 12). Citizenship is often presumed to be universal by the fact that citizens are defined by “what they have in common and in opposition to the particular characters of different groups” as well as the idea that “laws and rules are the same for all and are blind to particular individual and group differences” (Nash, 46).
The UN Commission on the Status of Women has been requesting all states to set up “specialized institutions to advance the economic, social and political position of women” (Howell, 167). While Howell notes that women are being employed in post communist Eastern Europe, it is mostly in the “light industries” such as health, education, and textiles (Howell, 169). These industries are often considered less central to the economy and wages are often lower in these sectors of the economy.
Gender, Politics, and the State, edited by Vicky Randall & georgina Waylan. London: Routledge,1998.
There are three ways that the state implements policies towards women
- policies actually aimed at women
- such as protective legislation (in the workplace) and laws aimed at reproduction
- policies dealing with relations between men and women
- such as property rights, sexuality, family relations
- these are often insitutionalized
- General policies (which are further sub categorized as
- “gender neutral” policies
- policies linked to the public sphere and seen as masculine
- state-defined politics, war, foreign policy, international trade, resource extraction and long distance communication
- policies concerned with welare and social reproduction
- home related issues, health and education
[Taken from Charlto et al. (1989) “Women, the State & Development,” Albany, NY: SUNY Press, but found in Waylan, 9-10]
These discussions are important to keep in mind as I switch to the interaction between sex and the state. A helpful definition of the modern European state is one that has the “power which claims the supreme right to make and enforce rules for all the inhabitants of a given territory” (Vogel, 32). In addition, “the state serves to establish a legal order capable of enforcing the peaceful coexistence and cooperation among individuals” (Vogel, 32). A being part of a modern state, an important concept is citizenship. Citizenship “provides a major link between states, individuals and collectives” (Waylan, 12). Citizenship is often presumed to be universal by the fact that citizens are defined by “what they have in common and in opposition to the particular characters of different groups” as well as the idea that “laws and rules are the same for all and are blind to particular individual and group differences” (Nash, 46).
The UN Commission on the Status of Women has been requesting all states to set up “specialized institutions to advance the economic, social and political position of women” (Howell, 167). While Howell notes that women are being employed in post communist Eastern Europe, it is mostly in the “light industries” such as health, education, and textiles (Howell, 169). These industries are often considered less central to the economy and wages are often lower in these sectors of the economy.
Gender, Politics, and the State, edited by Vicky Randall & georgina Waylan. London: Routledge,1998.
Jude Howell, “gender, Civil Society and the State,” 166-184
Kate Nash, “Beyond Liberalism? Feminist Theories of Democracy,” 45-57
Ursular Vogel, “The State and the making of gender: some historical legacies,” 29-44
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)