This essay tries to specify the origins, mechanisms and results of the autonomous power which the state possesses in relation to the major power groupings of ‘civil society’. The argument is couched generally, but it derives from a large, ongoing empirical research project into the development of power in human societies. At the moment, my generalisations are bolder about agrarian societies; concerning industrial societies I will be more tentative. I define the state and then pursue the implications of that definition. I discuss two essential parts of the definition, centrality and territoriality, in relation to two types of state power, termed here despotic and infrastructural power. I argue that state autonomy, of both despotic and infrastructural forms, flows principally from the state's unique ability to provide a territorially-centralised form of organization.

This paper offers a critical analysis of ‘groupism’ and suggests alternative ways of conceptualizing ethnicity without invoking the imagery of bounded groups. Alternative conceptual strategies focus on practical categories, cultural idioms, cognitive schemas, discursive frames, organizational routines, institutional forms, political projects, and contingent events. The conceptual critique has implications for the ways in which researchers, journalists, policymakers and NGOs address ‘ethnic conflict’ and ‘ethnic violence’. The paper concludes with an analysis of an empirical case from Eastern Europe.

One of the most notable political developments of the last thirty years has been increasing public and governmental demand for the quantification of social phenomena, yet sociologists generally have paid little attention to the spread of quantification or the significance of new regimes of measurement. Our article addresses this oversight by analyzing quantification – the production and communication of numbers – as a general sociological phenomenon. Drawing on scholarship across the social sciences in Europe and North America as well as humanistic inquiry, we articulate five sociological dimensions of quantification and call for an ethics of numbers.

What is the work of economics? How does it operate to establish facts and make them stable? Is it sometimes able to use the world as a laboratory? If so, what measures are necessary to organize the world as a laboratory for economic experiments? To what extent do these measures rely upon the efforts of nonacademic economists, and of other social agents and arrangements including think tanks, government policies, development programs, NGOs, and social movements? A recent “natural experiment” using the social world as a laboratory, carried out in Peru, produced remarkable results, enthusiastically received by economists in the United States and by international development agencies. The paper examines the work of organizing the socio-technical world required to produce this knowledge, the curious kind of facts that were produced, the connections among those involved in this work, in particular the organized work of the neoliberal movement, and the role of the new facts in making possible further efforts at economic experimentation.

Recent studies of symbols in ritual share two features. First, they isolate symbols from the ritualprocess; second, they interpret symbols as units containing meaning. In this paper I want to argue thatsymbols in ritual cannot be understood without a prior study of the nature of the communication medium of ritual in which they are embedded, in particular singing and dancing, and that once this has been done we find that symbols cannot any more be understood as units of meaning simply on the Saussurian signifier/signified model, however subtly this model is handled. Such varied writers as Bettelheim (1954) and Turner (1959) are to my mind examples of writers ultimately using this model for the study of meaning in ritual.

The phrase “welfare state” is of recent origin. It was first used to describe Labour Britain after 1945. From Britain the phrase made its way round the world. It was freely employed, usually but not exclusively by politicians and journalists, in relation to diverse societies at diverse stages of development. Historians also took over the phrase. Attempts were made to re-write nineteenth and twentieth century history, particularly British history, in terms of the “origins” and “development” of a “welfare state”.

A general typological model for the analysis of collective identify is outlined and applied to the case of German and Japanese national identity. Primordial, civic and cultural codes of boundary construction are described with respect to their logic of exclusion, corresponding rituals etc. German national identity is presented as a cultural project carried by the ‘Bildungsbürgertum’, whereas the Japanese identity is presented as a combination of primordial and civic elements.

This article discusses some contemporary transformations of citizenship across Western states, with a special emphasis on Europe. It is argued that citizenship is subject to countervailing “de-” and “re-ethnicization” pressures, the first pushing toward incorporating immigrants, the second toward retaining ties with emigrants abroad. While grounded in the dual nature of the modern state as a territorial and ethnic unit, and reinforced by contemporary globalizing and transnationalizing processes, de- and re-ethnicization are identifiable projects of the political left and right, respectively. Which trend prevails is then a simple function of who has the political majority.

In the first millennium before the Christian era a revolution took place in the realm of ideas and their institutional base which had irreversible effects on several major civilizations and on human history in general. The revolution or series of revolutions, which are related to Karl Jaspers' ‘Axial Age’, have to do with the emergence, conceptualization and institutionalization of a basic tension between the transcendental and mundane orders. This revolutionary process took place in several major civilizations including Ancient Israel, Ancient Greece, early Christianity, Zoroastrian Iran, early Imperial China and in the Hindu and Buddhist civilizations. Although beyond the axial age proper, it also took place in Islam.

“Diversity” is the focus of a wide-ranging corpus of normative discourses, institutional structures, policies and practices in business, public sector agencies, the military, universities and professions. Here, a brief account of the rise and diffusion of the term is provided. It now addresses a wide variety of social differences, while at least six distinct facets or goals of diversity policy can be discerned. Ambiguity, multivocality and banality are key characteristics of diversity discourse, but these function to strengthen, rather than weaken, the spread and acceptance of the notion. In many settings the commitment to diversity is mainstreamed, expected, and even taken-for-granted. Diversity discourse is related to ongoing processes of social diversification, but its diffusion is not driven by these processes. Overall, despite its many imprecisions, the impacts of the diversity corpus entail a transformation, or at least refinement, of the social imaginary.

this paper shows that religion is a basic principle that underlies modern poverty policy. however, it has played out in very different ways in societies according to the relative predominance of catholic, lutheran, and calvinist heritages. though religion is but one explanation for why we deal with the poor as we do today, systematically accounting for denominational differences in poor relief traditions can help to answer a series of otherwise perplexing cross-national differences in poverty policy and enrich existing explanations of the welfare state.

Transnational social spaces denote the circular flow of persons, goods, information and symbols across countries that have been triggered in the course of international labor migration and refugee flows. The question is how such transnational phenomena can be described, catagorued and explained. What are the implications for the adaptation of international migrants and their descendants in the economic, political and cultural realms in the countries of setdement? First, this discussion clarifies basic concepts, such as transnational social space and the main resources involved, such as various forms of social capital, the norm of reciprocity, solidarity, information and control. Second, the analysis outlines some causal macro-factors that may have opened up opportunities for migrants to build transnational spaces to a greater extent than before World War Two. Third, a few forays into the empirical realm serve to sketch the lineaments of the German-Turkish transnational social spaces: the emergence of Turkish niche businesses in Germany and transnational businesses spanning both countries; efforts of some Kurdish organizations to establish a homeland called ‘Kurdistan’; and collective identity among secondgeneration German-Turks in the religions realm, involving Islamic thought and organizations, but also secular forms of everyday culture. The article concludes with a discussion of factors that may limit the future growth of transnational social spaces.

This review explores contributions by science policy studies and the sociology of science to our understanding of the impact of governance on research content. Contributions are subsumed under two perspectives, namely an “impact of”—perspective that searches for effects of specific governance arrangements and an “impact on”—perspective that asks what factors contribute to the construction of research content and includes governance among them. Our review shows that little is known so far about the impact of governance on knowledge content. A research agenda does not necessarily need to include additional empirical phenomena but must address the macro-micro-macro link inherent to the question in its full complexity, and systematically exploit comparative approaches in order to establish causality. This requires interdisciplinary collaboration between science policy studies, the sociology of science, and bibliometrics, which all can contribute to the necessary analytical toolbox.

This paper aims to demonstrate that cosmopolitanism should be understood as a transnational mode of practice, whereby actors construct bonds of mutual commitment and reciprocity across borders through public discourse and sociopolitical struggle. This practice oriented perspective allows us to question three of the main assumptions imbedded within most frameworks theorizing global solidarity, namely cultural homogenization, political fragmentation, and social thinness. To illustrate my argument, I draw upon examples taken from the alternative globalization movement.

The study purports to show how a bias, known as methodological nationalism, has weighed down research and investigation on migration until recently. Relying on the contribution of work on transnational communities, the authors propose a programmatic conclusion.

Most of the subjects concerned with Israel, such as the location of the military and militaristic culture, are heavily distorted in comparison to other themes prevalant in the discourse and the debates in the social sciences, very much like the other issues linked with the Jewish-Arab conflict and Jewish-Arab relations (Kimmerling, 1992). Ideological and value loaded considerations blur the issue, making even the usage of the term ‘militarism’ in the canonical textbooks a taboo in Israel. The main purpose of this paper is three-fold: 1) to present a brief survey of the present state of the literature on so-called ‘civil-military relations’ in Israel, from which 2) a revision can be made of the overall impact of the Jewish-Arab conflict and the militarization of Israeli society. This will be followed by 3) a reformulation of the effect of militarization on the institutional and value spheres of the Israeli collectivity.

Par un paradoxe tout à fait conforme à la théorie webérienne de la relation entre Ies intentions des agents et le sens historique de leurs actions, la contribution la plus importante que Max Weber ait apportée à la sociologie de la religion se situe sans doute sur un tout autre terrain que celui qu'il a choisi pour son affrontement de toute une vie avec Marx. Si, dans son effort obstiné pour établir l'efficacité historique des croyances religieuses contre Ies expressions Ies plus réductrices de la théorie marxiste, Max Weber est parfois conduit à une exaltation du charisme qui, comme on l'a remarque, n'est pas sans évoquer une philosophic «héroique» de l'histoire a la manière de Carlyle, par exemple lorsqu'il désigne le chef charismatique comme « la force révolutionnaire spécifiquement ‘créatrice’ de l'histoire » (I), il reste qu'il fournit lui-même le moyen d'échapper à l'alternative simpliste dont ses analyses Ies plus incertaines sont le produit, c'est-à-dire à l'opposition entre l'illusion de l'autonomie absolue portant à concevoir le message religieux comme surgissement inspiré et la théorie réductrice qui en fait le reflet direct des conditions économiques et sociales: il met en effet en lumière ce que Ies deux positions opposées et complémentaires ont en commun d'oublier, à savoir le travail religieux que réalisent Ies agents et Ies porte-parole spécialisés, investis du pouvoir, institutionnel ou non, de répondre, par un type déterminé de pratiques ou de discours, à une catégorie particulière de besoins propres à des groupes sociaux déterminés.

Honesty and trust affect the functioning of the state and the market, and, conversely, the quality of formal rules and institutions has an impact on interpersonal trust. This paper organizes and critiques research on the relationship between trust and government; it stresses the mutual interaction between trust and democracy and the impact of corruption. Given this context, the concluding section discusses the transition process in post-socialist countries, highlighting the tensions between interpersonal trust and trust in public institutions.

The nebula-like cluster is a common trait in the spatial picture of man's attributes. Take any atlas showing economic or cultural elements and you will find an endless sequence of spatial distributions which have a concentrated core surrounded by a border zone of outwards decreasing density.

There is nothing such as one single and simple explanation of the “nebula-distribution”. But nevertheless one particular process which creates this type of distribution—temporarily or as an end result—seems to be highly significant: diffusion of techniques and ideas through the network of social contacts.

This article considers six factors that are currently shaping the religious life of Europe. These are the Judaeo-Christian heritage, the continuing influence of the historic churches, the changing patterns of church-going, new arrivals from outside, secular reactions and the growing significance of religion in the modern world order. Any assessment of the future of religion in Europe must take all of these into account, not least their mutual and necessarily complex interactions.