Gegenstand dieser Arbeit sind die (Selbst-)Darstellungen von Gründer_innen von Nichtregierungsorganisationen (NGOs) im Bereich Kinder- und Frauenrechte in Tamil Nadu, Südindien. Um diese (Selbst-)Darstellungen angemessen analysieren zu können, wird zuerst eine analytische Herangehensweise entworfen, die davon ausgeht, dass bestehende soziologische Konzepte, die in erster Linie in Auseinandersetzung mit einem spezifischen (west-europäischen) Kontext entstanden sind, nicht unhinterfragt auf andere Kontexte übertragen werden können. Das erschwert die Verwendung von Begrifflichkeiten wie „Zivilgesellschaft“, „Entwicklung“ oder auch der scheinbar klaren Dichotomie von Moderne und Tradition. Eisenstadt machte diese Problematik in der von ihm begonnenen Debatte um „Multiple Modernities“ deutlich. In der vorliegenden Arbeit wird an diese Diskussion mit handlungstheoretischen Argumenten angeknüpft, um auch Akteursperspektiven angemessen analysieren zu können. Nachdem der theoretische Rahmen und die methodische Grundlage der Arbeit erläutert wurden, wird Kontextwissen erarbeitet, um die Analyse der Interviews einzubetten. Es werden Diskurse um Kaste und den Status von Frauen sowie Aspekte der aktuellen politischen Situation Tamil Nadus betrachtet. Die (Selbst-)Darstellungen lassen sich dann anhand der im Titel angedeuteten Dreiteilung aufschlüsseln: Die Gründer_innen setzen sich zum ersten mit der eigenen Rolle auseinander. Sie beschreiben sich als „social worker“ und greifen in den Selbstbeschreibungen zum Teil auf populistische Elemente des politischen Umfeldes zurück. Zum zweiten beschreiben sie die eigene Position gegenüber ihren „Zielgruppen“. Dabei wird deutlich, dass die Beziehungen zwischen NGO und „community“ zwischen Partizipation und Paternalismus schwanken. Zum dritten formulieren sie Zielsetzungen in Abgrenzung zu anderen (lokalen) politischen Akteuren: Sie grenzen sich zum Beispiel von einem ihrem Verständnis nach „westlichen“ Begriff von Entwicklung ab und formulieren demgegenüber „eigene“ Ziele. Sie reflektieren über lokale Kooperationen, z.B. mit politischen Persönlichkeiten, Kastenassoziationen, aber auch über Abgrenzungen oder Zusammenstöße, die sich dabei ergeben. Insgesamt wird deutlich, dass die (Selbst-)Darstellungen der Gründer_innen sich spannungsgeladen und ambivalent auf unterschiedliche Diskurse, Ideen und soziale Praktiken beziehen. Sie lassen sich insbesondere nicht in eine Perspektive von „Entwicklung“ einordnen, welche auf der Dichotomie von Moderne und Tradition aufbaut. / The subject of this thesis are the (self-)descriptions of founders of children's and women's rights NGOs in Tamil Nadu, South India. To allow an appropriate analysis of these (self-)descriptions, an analytical framework is constructed which is based upon the assumption that sociological concepts which are products of involvement with western-European contexts cannot be transferred to different contexts unquestioned. This complicates the use of existing concepts, as "development", "civil society" or the seemingly simple and evident dichotomy of modernity and tradition. Shmuel N. Eisenstadt started the discussion about the difficulties connected to this dichotomy through the debate about "multiple modernities". The thesis takes its point of departure from this debate and develops action-theoretical arguments to draw a framework for the analysis of the perspectives of actors in the field of NGOs in Tamil Nadu. A discussion of the analytical and methodological framework of this study is followed by a description of selected contextual aspects of the interviewee’s lives. Particularly interesting in the study of Tamil Nadu are discourses about the status of women, the relevance of caste, and facets of the (current) political situation. The analysis of the (self-)descriptions is structured by the tripartion visible in the title of the thesis: Firstly, the founders have to deal with their own position. They describe themselves as "social workers" and are to some extent drawing on elements of the (current) populist political environment in Tamil Nadu to define this role. Secondly, they describe their position towards their "target groups". It becomes clear that the relationship between founders and "communities" fluctuates between participation and paternalism. Thirdly, they formulate their goals in relationship to other (local) political actors: They dissociate themselves from "western" views of development and frame their "own projects" in opposition. They reflect on the possibilities as well as the restrictions of local cooperation, for example with political figures, caste associations, and so on. It becomes clear that the (self-)descriptions of the founders suspensefully and ambivalently draw from different social practices, discourses, and ideas. They especially cannot be classified from the perspective of a (linear) "development" based upon the dichotomy of tradition and modernity.

Recent global and structural transformations, a West-centric development agenda and the triumph of neoliberal politics have led to destructive consequences for many local communities and individual life chances. The global dominance of the West-centric development agenda, with its roots in the colonial past, has created uneven developments and an unjust world in which Western countries continue to gain advantages and increase their prosperity. Although a minority elite in many non-Western countries share the same interests as Western countries and their global organs, the majority of people in these countries are suffering from increasing socioeconomic inequalities. As a result of the dogmatic belief in a singular and West-centric modernity and its practices, many problems are considered to be the result of non-Western countries’ inabilities to complete the project of modernity in accordance with Western blueprints. This has also influenced social work as a global and modern profession. Social problems are often individualised and the reasons behind many inequalities are increasingly related to non-Western people’s individual shortcomings and traditional cultural backgrounds. In Western and non-Western countries equally are the neoliberal structural and institutional transformations ignored and social problems of individuals and families defined as a matter of wrong and deviant actions and choices. The main objective of the dissertation, which is constituted of four articles and an overall introduction and summary, is to examine the consequences of recent neoliberal globalisation based on the belief in a single and West-centric modernity and development agenda and their consequences for social work facing increasing global inequalities. The following research questions have guided the work: ‘How can social work play an effective role in combating social problems and otherisation, marginalisation and increasing inequalities in a globalised world?’, ‘How does the global development agenda function within the local arenas of social work?’, ‘Are development projects improving people’s life chances in local communities in non-Western countries?’, ‘How informed and responsive are social workers towards the global context of local problems?’ The work is based on a qualitative design using qualitative content analysis for analysing data collected through interviews, participant observations and official documents. The results show that irrespective of where and in which context social problems are appearing, since local problems often have global roots, a global perspective to local problems should be included in every practices of social work in order to develop new methods of practices in an increasingly globalised field of work. Destruction of local communities, forced migration from non-Western countries, and marginalisation of people with immigrant background in Western countries should not be considered only as local problems, but also as problems with their roots in global structural inequalities which reproduces global social problems with local consequences. It is argued that social work should consider the dilemmas and problems connected to the taken for granted West-centric theories, understandings and practices of social work in order to develop new methods of practices for combating social problems, marginalisation and increasing inequalities in a globalised world. Such a position includes practicing multilevel social work, social work in global alliances beyond the division of East and West, and mobilisation against neoliberalism and the retreat of the welfare state. This requires critical standpoints against the relationship between the global context of the neoliberal ideology and practices in a Western-dominated and postcolonial world and the daily practices of social work. / Localised Globalities and Social Work: Contemporary Challenges

Dans cette thèse je démontre comment les imaginaires de la nation serbe, de l’Occident et des valeurs universelles (démocratie, droits de l’homme et tolérance) véhiculées au sein de la revue ‘Orthodoxie’ (publiée par l’Eglise Orthodoxe Serbe) ont pour but final la préservation de la position sociale de l’Eglise et de ses intérêts en tant qu’une institution religieuse au sein de la société serbe. Cette ‘résistance’ aux changements construit des imaginaires sociaux qui nous appréhendons comme des représentations sociales et ont tendance à (re)devenir la vision dominante de la société serbe. J’étudie le discours de la revue ‘Orthodoxie’ et des acteurs qui y contribuent afin de montrer le processus des créations des imaginaires sociaux et leurs tentatives de se présenter au public et dans la sphère publique comme les courants de pensée dominants concernant la nation serbe, l’Occident et les valeurs ‘universelles’. J’ai répondu aux questions suivantes : - comment la tradition nationale « se traditionalise », la culture nationale s’idéalise et l’identité nationale se sacralise ? - comment l’imaginaire de l’Europe et de la culture européenne/occidentale (‘EUX’) se construisent en opposition à l’imaginaire de la nation serbe (‘NOUS’) ? - comment les valeurs de la démocratie, des droits de l’homme et de la tolérance sont imaginées à travers une telle construction opposée (‘EUX’ versus ‘NOUS’) ? / In this thesis I demonstrate how do the imaginaries of Serbian nation, of Occident and of ‘universal’ Values (democracy, human rights, tolerance), constructed in the journal published by the SOC serve as factors of conservation and protection of the social position of the Church, its social and political interests in the sense of national religious institution in the Serbian society. The ‘resistance’ to change allows the construction of social imaginaries that we comprehend as social representations with a tendency to become (again) or to impose them as a dominant vision of the Serbian society. I studied the discourse in the ‘Orthodoxy’ journal and the social actors that published their articles in order to demonstrate the process of the creation of social imaginaries and the tentative to present them publicly/in the public sphere as dominant currents of social thoughts on Serbian nation, Occident and ‘universal’ values. I answered to the following questions:- The way national tradition is “traditionalized”, national culture is idealized and national identity is sacralized.- How the imaginary of Europe and European/western culture (‘THEM) are constructed in an opposition to the imaginary of a Serbian nation (‘US’)?- How the values of democracy, human rights and tolerance are imagined through this opposed imaginary construction (‘US’ vs ‘THEM’)?

This thesis deals with the concept of modernity called "nadcivilizace" ("supercivilization") that was developed in the nineteen-fifties by Czech philosopher Jan Patočka (1907-1977) in his originally unpublished study Nadcivilizace a její vnitřní konflikt. The main goal of the thesis is to introduce this concept in the framework of the author's life and work, as well as in the context of current research in the field of historical sociology. This goal is fulfilled through three main steps, which are preceded by preliminary remarks about the issues of nowadays civilizational analysis. The first part is focused on the introduction of the author's concept of modernity as it was presented in the aforementioned study. Patočka's original term "nadcivilizace" is introduced and put into the context of civilizational analysis. At the same time, the circumstances of the genesis of the text, and the spiritual framework of the epoch in which Czech philosopher lived, are presented. Second part attempts to put the original concept into the author's lecture of philosophy of history, and to demonstrate the changes that occurred in Patočka's understanding of modernity in his work Kacířské eseje o filosofii dějin (Heretical Essays in the Philosophy of History, 1975). Finally, the last part is dedicated to the problem...

No description available.