[governance] Mercenaries on the list-- Amateur, professional, mercenary semantics

[Ginger Paque]

In an informal context, an amateur does what they do, for the love of their art, craft, or other activity, sometimes inexpertly, sometimes very well.

A professional is often given that status because they are paid to carry out their activity, as opposed to an amateur, who does not get paid. Sometimes this indicates a higher level of quality, but this is not always true.

Since in this discussion we are not talking about mercenaries as paid combatants in an armed conflict, what is the difference between a professional and a mercenary? In the best case scenario, isn't a professional someone who gets paid to do what they want to do anyway? Wouldn't we RATHER have professionals working with us? 
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Garth Graham 
  To: governance 
  Sent: Sunday, May 25, 2008 10:53 AM
  Subject: Re: [governance] Mercenaries on the list


  On 24-May-08, at 2:46 PM, Jacques Berleur wrote:

  > 2b) "The civil society covers all the active networks in the  
  > political public space which do not depend
  > upon either the administrative and governmental system, or the  
  > business system." ([Weerts, 2004],
  > .......
  >
  > Definition 2b has my preference. Hope this may help. But I don't  
  > see how to derive the "mercenaries on
  > the list" from the definition!!!

  The way you get to "mercenaries" is by being a bit less descriptive  
  and a bit more cynical about the system's process in the definition.   
  In answer to that “what is civil society?” question, I prefer the  
  argument of Martin Carnoy and Manuel Castells that global alliances  
  of common interest among corporations and governments have invented a  
  construct called “civil society.”  They said:

  “The other axis of the nation-state's reconfiguration is its attempt  
  to regain legitimacy and to represent the social diversity of its  
  constituency through the process of decentralization and devolution  
  of power and resources. This translates primarily into revitalizing  
  sub-state national governments (such as Scotland or Catalonia),  
  regional governments, local governments, and non-governmental  
  organizations. Indeed, the dramatic expansion of non-governmental  
  organizations around the world, most of them subsidized and supported  
  by the state, can be interpreted as the extension of the state into  
  civil society, in an effort to diffuse conflict and increase  
  legitimacy by shifting resources and responsibility to the  
  grassroots.”  …..

  …..   “What emerges is a new form of the state. It is a state made of  
  shared institutions, and enacted by bargaining and interactive  
  iteration all along the chain of decision making: national  
  governments, co-national governments, supra-national bodies,  
  international institutions, governments of nationalities, regional  
  governments, local governments, and NGOs (in our conception: neo- 
  governmental organizations). Decision-making and representation take  
  place all along the chain, not necessarily in the hierarchical, pre- 
  scripted order. This new state functions as a network, in which all  
  nodes interact, and are equally necessary for the performance of  
  state's functions. The state of the Information Age is a network state.”

  …. “Thus, the state diversifies the mechanisms and levels of its key  
  functions (accumulation, reproduction, domination and legitimation),  
  and distributes its performance along the network. The nation-state  
  becomes an important, coordinating node in this interaction, but it  
  does not concentrate either the power or the responsibility to  
  respond to conflicting pressures.”

  ….. “The second way to establish legitimacy in the new historical  
  context is decentralization of state power to sub-state levels: to  
  sub-national groupings, to regions, and to local governments. This  
  increases the probability that citizens will identify with their  
  institutions and participate in the political process. While nation- 
  states cede power, they also shift responsibility, in the hope of  
  creating buffers between citizens' disaffection and national  
  governments. Legitimacy through decentralization and citizen  
  participation in non-governmental organizations seems to be the new  
  frontier of the state in the 21st century.

    Still, the state will have to respond to social movements' demands  
  to avoid a legitimacy crisis.”  ……

  Quotes from: Martin Carnoy and Manuel Castells, “Globalization, the  
  knowledge society and the network state: Poulantzas at the  
  millennium,” Global Networks, 1, 1, 2001, 1-18

  There is, after all, some joy in the thought that many of the debates  
  about representation on the IGC list are merely a reflection of "the  
  new frontier of the state in the 21st century."  Also that, if "the  
  state of the Information Age is a network state," then the protocol  
  that governs its structure is called "Internet Protocol."

  GG____________________________________________________________
  You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
       governance at lists.cpsr.org
  To be removed from the list, send any message to:
       governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

  For all list information and functions, see:
       http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20080525/015918bf/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance