Reflections on Casino

I represented Vice President Jamie Jackson in the Casino case and the environmentalist group in Harborco. The Casino conversation is a more simple negotiation in terms of numbers of people involved because there were only two people whereas the Harborco involves the whole class. Harborco was more complicated since it’s a multiparty negotiation. However, the Casino is really very difficult, personally speaking. Despite the difficulties that I have intrinsically, I think I still managed to reach a successful result.

One of the reasons why I felt a greater difficulty during the Casino talk is that the two parties were supposed to talk about not only their professional performance but also their relationship. I am not very good at handling the relational problem but it happened to be the most important part of this difficult conversation. In my childhood, my parents rarely had intimate talks with me or with my brother and then the children are not encouraged to share the deep most emotions towards the parents or siblings. Showing the intimacy is an embarrassing thing in my family and in most Chinese families. For example, boys are not supposed to cry. Hence, I have been very clumsy in this aspect. While growing up, I was not at ease to show my true feelings to my friends; I could be humorous and funny but I was not ready to say what I really thought. Right now, even with my boyfriend, I have similar problems. I need to think about what to say for a very long time beforehand. I need to prepare myself and summon the courage to initiate the conversation. In most situations, I will try not to touch on the sensitive parts and make the conversation flow. Hence, I was not comfortable for a deep conversation between Jamie Jackson and Allison although we had done the brainstorming. I think that my personality might prevent myself from being communicative because I am not good at expressing what I feel. This might make people think that I am always discontent or the inverse.

Only after doing Thomas-Kilmann assessment, did I know that I have a propensity to avoid or withdraw from the problems during the negotiations. I assume that this is a common problem among East Asians. In the Taiwanese culture, people avoid to say “No” directly to one another because they want to maintain the harmony within the group. It’s very difficult for me to come to someone and then to make a complaint to the person directly. Blaming somebody or asking a person to assuming the responsibility is not in the traditional culture because the decisions are based on the consensus. Nowadays, the American culture permeates the Taiwanese traditional culture: people are more and more straightforward. However, it’s very hard for me to suggest the other party that he has made a mistake and he has not met the expectations. Normally, I would prefer to escape from the conversation like this kind. I would just avoid seeing that person and postpone the conversation from taking place. However, I had an American partner who represented Allison. He was more direct than me. I felt some pressure from his questions. For instance, when he asked me “Are you avoiding me?” I felt a sudden guilt and I stuttered a little bit because I felt as if I was truly avoiding Allison. During the negotiations, my partner came up most of the key questions, which actually saved me from not getting my key issues. Nonetheless, I think I need to be more active in this kind conversation next time because I won’t have the partners of same character all the times. If I keep behaving in this way, the others would judge that I am not engaging in the conversation and they would probably give up talking the problems through.

Notwithstanding, I realized that I have a suppleness that would be actually helpful in future negotiations. When we debriefed the situation, other classmates mentioned that admitting their own responsibility in the event facilitated the conversation. It’s not difficult for me to assume the responsibility and to identify my contribution to the problems. During my education, I am always asked to seek for the reason inside myself first before going to seek faults in others. With aid of introspection, I avoid being stubborn and blaming the others, which does not redound to the mutual trust and to the ongoing negotiations. Therefore, I think this quality is a useful factor.

Furthermore, active listening is a good quality in understanding the other party’s concern. One can listen to the counterpart but at the same time is not paying attention to the counterpart. If a person is rush to react, he would think about how to fight back along the entire conversation. Actually I think this is an American propensity because not responding immediately means that somehow this person is slow in USA. On the contrary, I am a very good listener. My friends like to talk to me about their problems because I am very patient and good at listening without being careless. I suppose this is mainly because I am from Taiwan. Under the influence of Confucian philosophy, people are taught to be more patient. “Silence is gold,” says a Chinese proverb. I think it’s appropriate to be not hasty to respond because in the case of Casino the hasty behavior is not useful in lowering the counterpart’s defense. Luckily, my partner is not oppressive and he did not start with harsh accusation. Therefore, I did not have to arm myself either. My counterpart and I were both calm and not hurried to say who is at fault. At the end, I think we had reached a better understanding. Hence, I assume that this negotiation was successful in terms of building a positive professional relationship for the future.

Conflcts and I

The first connection that I have with conflict resolution is that I was born in Taiwan, an island in constant tensions and conflicts with Mainland China.

I have been an independent person since high school. After the age of 15, I lived by myself in Taipei, 400 kilometers away from home. I travel a lot; I don’t travel with a group, and I travel many times alone, which allows me to see the world the way it is and allows me to go to places where there are not many tourists. I have a global orientation, traveling to more than 17 countries and living in France, England, USA and Taiwan. I have lived in France for more two years. When I was in high school, I spent one year in the province of France. I spent my senior year in Paris, studying International Law and Organizations. As a result of traveling intensively, it’s easier for me to get used to a new culture.

I also took a class in Cross-cultural communications at GWU, in which I learned to communicate with the people from different nationalities. Cross-cultural communications deepened my interests in being an international negotiator.

I was Chief of the dormitory committee while I was a sophomore, and I needed to handle various incidents and conflicts everyday. There are 1100 girls in five dorms. Some girls caused troubles for the neighboring girls. I received the complaints, sometimes anonymous ones, and then I needed to go to the girls who were placed a complaint and talk to them. I acted as a mediator and a facilitator of intra-dormitory conflicts. I also served as the liaison between the residents and the administrative level, the university. In many events, I needed to represent the interests and concerns of the student body and demanded the school to improve the provided facilities and services. I think that this precious experience gives me a very good start in conflict resolution and negotiations.

Summer Studies in Oxford

暑假也可以去牛津晃晃，學學人權法，還有溫習高中在牛津的日子，看著圖片，突然很想去，所以今天一定要快快申請，下星期一截止，加油加油～～

The GW/Oxford Program in International Human Rights Law has been developed by the University of Oxford Department for Continuing Education and The George Washington University Law School. It is intended to prepare students to contribute to the improvement of human rights conditions in their homelands and around the world.

For the 2006 session, the program has assembled an internationally recognized faculty offering courses on the philosophy, history, doctrine and practice of international human rights law. The program emphasizes advocacy and dissemination skills, as well as formal knowledge of human rights law, the means of its enforcement and its status in a contentious world.

In addition to an introductory course on the fundamentals of international human rights law, the program offers an advanced seminar on human rights lawyering and afternoon electives that address important contemporary issues in the field. These include seminars on human rights and peacekeeping, the predicament of populations at heightened risk of human rights violations (including women and refugees) and human rights and the marketplace.
Most instruction is conducted in small groups relying on case-based materials and simulations, allowing ample opportunity for exchange with instructors and the development of professional skills.



WHO SHOULD ATTEND?

The program welcomes law students, graduate students, lawyers, legal practitioners, staff of international and non-governmental organizations, researchers and other human rights professionals with a demonstrated interest in the field. Applicants should bear in mind that this is an intensive program of university-level study, and should be confident that they are academically and linguistically prepared for such a program. The program is conducted in English, and participants whose first language is not English are required to demonstrate English reading and writing ability by submitting proof of a TOEFL score of 600.



NEW COLLEGE, OXFORD

Students will be accommodated and take their meals in New College, Oxford. Founded by William of Wykham in 1379, it is one of the largest and best known of the Oxford colleges, and one of the most beautiful. The college is located in the center of Oxford, close to the St. Cross Law Faculty Building, where the program's classes are held and in which the Bodleian Law Library is located. Computer facilities are available at New College, and ethernet connections are provided in all rooms for students who want to bring their own laptops.



LECTURE SERIES AND OTHER SPECIAL EVENTS

In 2006, the program again will include a lecture series by some of the leading authorities and actors in the field of international human rights law. The guest speakers for 2005 included Mr. Geoffrey Nice, Principal Trial Attorney in the prosecution of Slobodan Milosevic at the ICTY. The program also offers a human rights film series, a careers panel and a series of meetings with faculty members on their own work.


COURSE CREDIT

The program is accredited by the American Bar Association (ABA) for 5 semester credits.The program also qualifies for Continuing Legal Education with the Law Society in the United Kingdom. For non-law students, credit can generally be arranged with graduate programs at the student's request. Applicants should confirm this with their home universities before applying. Acceptance of any credit or grade for any course taken in the program, including clinical courses, is subject to determination by the applicant's home university.

I love Psalm 23

The Lord is my Shepherd; I shall not want.
He maketh me to lie down in green pastures:
He leadeth me beside the still waters.
He restoreth my soul:
He leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for His name' sake.

Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death,
I will fear no evil: For thou art with me;
Thy rod and thy staff, they comfort me.
Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies;
Thou annointest my head with oil; My cup runneth over.

Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life,
and I will dwell in the House of the Lord forever.

The French Way

Introduction
When the rioters burned the buses in suburban Paris, the Frenchmen and the world were shocked. When French President Mitterrand was reported to have a mistress, the world was amazed by the indifference shown by the French public. Famous photographer Robert Doisneau captured romantic couples in Paris. What kind of people is this? There are some clichés about the French people and the life in France. Are they really arrogant? Are they really bad at learning English? Do they dislike the USA and the fast food? Are they romantic? How can we explain their reaction?
In this essay, I want to show an image of France without bias and stereotype by giving the French way of communications first. French way of communication is not a “French exception”. It comes from somewhere deep in the culture. While analyzing the specific way how French people communicate with one another, I will also use some culture factors to explain the communication characteristics. I will also seek for a little comparison through the culture shock that I have been through in France to illustrate the cross cultural communication.

How do the French people communicate?
According to Edith Wharton, there are two ways of judging a foreign people: at first sight, impressionistically, in the manner of the passing traveler; or after living among the foreign people, soberly and advisedly, and with all the vain precautions enjoined in another grave contingency. She refers to the French culture as “poetry of life”. However, instead of seeing French culture through a subtle object, one can see the French way of giving the message to one another by a more objective analysis: Geert Hofstede Analysis . We can also re-examine the French communication through nine lenses at the same time: family, religion, language, education, history, politics, economics, national resources (geography) and class structure. The culture factors can actually tell us why the French act in a certain way.

French people and uncertainty avoidance
The Geert Hofstede analysis for France illustrates their emphasis on uncertainty avoidance. France gets 7, Taiwan gets 20 and USA gets 32; a low score means the country does not like uncertainty. The high uncertainty avoidance ranking indicates France’s concerns for rules, regulations, and issues with career security. I think one of the reasons why French people behave in this way is the French language.
Modern French used to be one of many dialects spoken in the territory. It was spoken primarily in the region of the River La Loire. Now French is spoken by almost 100% of population although there are some minor dialects. The language belongs to Romance family. The grammar of the language is very refined and complicated compared to English, having the conjugations and accords of feminine and masculine terms. As many languages of Romance language, verbs are very precise in expressing time and meaning. This feature of French leads to the tendency that French people prefer the rules and the precision. French is a low context culture.
In real life communication, the uncertainty avoidance is embodied by the clear-cut conclusion in the negotiation setting. Everything should be more or less concrete and written down in order to be effective. As Taiwanese, I was very frustrated with the uncertainty avoidance because I felt like being forced to decide and speak out the decision. At the same time, because of this high uncertainty avoidance tendency, French people tend to take the process of cooperation more slowly and they prefer to have more time to be well prepared. They prefer to have a meeting during which everyone has already something concrete to provide and contribute. In this way, they are not comfortable with Taiwanese “loose” behavior. For instance, I always need to have almost everything done before the group meeting when I studied in France. The French classmates arrive at the meeting and they would put everybody’s efforts together and get a consensus about how to present the subject.
Although there is an increasing usage of argot and suburban way of speaking, French is a formal language. While doing business or joining the conversation with a bunch of French people, it’s important to demonstrate a good command on formal French although most of French people have learned English. With aid of a good mastery of French, people can gain a very quick access to the core of social events and win more respect, which would facilitate the affairs.

Some Tips
 Most individuals in business speak English. If you do not speak French, it is very important that you apologize for your lack of knowledge.
 The French have a great appreciation for the art of conversation.
 Punctuality is treated very casually in France.
 Business can be conducted during any meal, but lunch is best.

French people and individualism
In addition to uncertainty avoidance, France gets 11th position in individualism and collectivism scale in the Geert Hofstede analysis meanwhile USA is the 1st individualistic culture. The individualism comes from the religion: Christianity. Roman Catholicism is the most popular religion in France, which represents from 83 to 88% of the population; at the same time, the Muslim population is growing with an amazing speed and it is estimated to be around 5 to 10%. Judaism is also popular in France; it’s about 1% of the population.
Individualism in French means that personal goals override the allegiance to groups like the family or the employer. Competition and the “I” sayings are encouraged. Hence, French people also stress the individual achievement. For example, French people like people to show their competitiveness, which I was very shocked and uncomfortable because people in Taiwan are not encouraged to show off. Because of this, I had a quarrel with my high school classmates because I said that the French people are so arrogant and they don’t care about the others. Right now, I understand that the French culture stress the individual’s performance. Next time if I have also to show my own capacity, I will be at a better position to deal with this aspect. At the same time, it’s also a culture which demands a lot of privacy because they think the personal life has nothing to do with the person’s achievement. This explains why people don’t care about the fact of President Francois Mitterrand had a mistress; in the eye of Taiwanese society, it’s not conceivable to be a great and achieved person with disrupting the collective order and values.
However, I need to counter this “individualism” argument by emphasizing the importance of family in French culture which makes the French people sometimes behave more like Taiwanese than like Americans. As most European cultures, family is the priority for French people. The French people cherish their family and defend the traditional values which originate from the family although many French couples don’t get married despite the children. The rights of the homosexual couples and unmarried couples are guaranteed by PACS (Pacte civil de solidarite), and PACS is a contract which allows two individuals to organize their united life. Although people are very tolerant towards the homosexual, the marriage between same sexe couple is still illegal.
Like other Southern European cultures, French young people have a stronger attachment to their family than the American young people. The young people generally stay with the parents till they are early thirties in some cases. Parents pay for the rent if the children want to live outside of the family, but basically the children can still rely on the parents’ financial support. The phenomenon is getting more and more attention because the younger generation sometimes refuses to leave their nest and earn their own living. In this way, French people are more similar to Asian; young people leave the nest in a very late stage of their life.

Some Tips
 The French have a great respect for privacy. Knock and wait before entering into a room. Additionally, do not "drop in" unannounced. Always give notice before your arrival.
 France is a highly stratified society, with strong definition and competition between classes.

French people and power distance
Power distance refers to the extent to which a society accepts that power in relationships, institutions, and organizations is distributed unequally. The Geert Hofstede analysis ranks France with quite a low score, and a low score means that France is a country which prefers a large power distance. (Taiwan gets 19 in the ranking and USA gets 26.)
I think the reason why French people are more tolerant of an unequally distributed power structure can be traced back to the history and to the education system. In the interim it is exemplified and reinforced by education and politics. Although France is a republic right now, France used to be governed by the dynasties. The emperors and the aristocrats formed an elite class: they’ve got knowledge and resources. Notwithstanding French people are not under the reign of aristocrats anymore, the elite class is embodied by another way of ruling and superiority.
The elitism permeates in the French culture due to the education system and the government officer selection. When graduating from junior high school, the students need to pass the examination called Brevet; only those who succeed in the exam can go on to senior high school. At the end of “premiere” (second year of senior high school), all students need to pass the French Bacalaureat to test students’ ability in French literature. Those who fail the exam need to repeat the second year in senior high school. In order to go to university, students are required to succeed in Bacalaureat at the end of the third year. With the Bacalaureat, students can apply for universities as they wish and they don’t need to pay for the tuition. However, students can also choose another route: go to “preparatory school”, which prepares students to pass a series of selective examinations at the end of two more years’ studies. The students who succeed in the entrance exam of “grande ecole” can go to the elite school such as National Administrative School and National Normal School. These students will be next public servants and teachers. People without the degree from National Administrative School can still work in government but if a person wants to work in a higher position, the person had better have the master degree from the very best schools which aim to shape the next generation bureaucrats. This process of forming future officers, professors and engineers helps the people to accept some social phenomena with protesting.
While building connection with the professors or dealing with the authority in France, Taiwanese and Americans often find that it’s hard to be familiar with them. For example, professors don’t have office hours and they don’t need to be familiar with the students. “They are neither accessible nor helpful!” is a usual complaint. However, the distance between the professor and the French students is large and tolerated because they represent the authority. French students just accept this as a fact. In Taiwan, I respect the professors. However, students can still approach teachers and have a conversation more easily because Taiwan has been influenced by the USA.

Some Tips
 Dress conservative and invest in well-tailored clothing.
 Patterned fabrics and dark colors are most acceptable, but avoid bright colors.
 French businessmen do not loosen their ties or take off their jackets in the office.
 Women should also dress conservatively. Avoiding bright or gaudy colors is recommended.
 Women should also avoid any glitzy or overpowering objects, such as flashy jewelry.

French people and femininity
French culture is more of feminine traits than Taiwanese one, but they are similar in the scale. A feminine society thinks that sexual equality is important and thus gender roles are more flexible in French society than in a masculine society, such as Japan. The society has a more feminine culture, but all in all it’s still a traditional society: man has the final say on most of the family decision although man is supposed to be more caring and nurturing.
French society is also a society in which a person should show his sense of beauty and taste, which goes back to France which Edith Wharton has described. The French enjoy life and have a strong sympathy toward the weak. In this sense, French people are indeed romantic.
In communication, the style is less aggressive and more reflective. Speaking softly is a common code in France; although interrupting is not forbidden, one still need to listen to another person’s talk with attention. In the meantime, the French enjoy having intellectual debates with others.

Some Tips
 The French are very conscientious of their appearance.
 The French frequently interrupt each other, as the argument is a form of entertainment, but the French often complain that North Americans lecture rather than converse.
 Be sensitive to the volume of your voice. Speaking with loud voice and laughing hard might offend or embarrass everyone in a restaurant, meeting, or on the street.
 Eye contact is frequent and intense, and can often be intimidating to North Americans. French handshakes are not as firm as in the United States or in Taiwan.
 Avoid drinking hard liquor before meals or smoking cigars between courses. The French believe this permeates the taste buds, compromising the taste of the meal.
 Good gifts to present include books or music, as they demonstrate interest in intellectual pursuits.

Conclusion
It’s never easy to understand one culture by a mere analysis, but through the analysis people can have a more accurate and objective view of French communication characteristics in a nutshell. One should now know the French culture is a low context language culture; the French don’t like the ambiguity. French culture is also an individualistic one: competition is encouraged and personal goals are important. Although individualism is popular, the French still consider themselves as part of society. The French also tend to accept a larger degree of uneven power distribution. In communication, it’s easy to observe the difference of power and hierarchy. It’s also a more feminine society, in which the tone and the voice of conversations would be softer. The role of women is well regarded, but still it’s still a male chauvinist society.

References
Flanner, Janet. Paris Was Yesterday, 1925-1939. Harcourt, 1988.
Marquardt, M., Berger, N., and Loan, P. HRD in the Age of Globalization. Basic Books, 2004.
Ministry of culture website: http://www.culture.fr/
Samovar, Larry and Porter, Richard. Communication between Cultures, 2nd edition. Wadsworth, 1995.
Wharton, Edith. French Ways and Their Meaning. Berkshire House Books, 1997.

Civil Society and Its Impact

Introduction
I attended a small seminar held by a grass root organization called One Voice a few days ago. This organization is funded by several Californian Jews, aiming at building the Israelis’ and Palestinians’ capacity. This organization held several peaceful manifestations to urge the Palestinians to vote. The long term goal is to provide the public a better understanding about the other side and induce the peace resolution of Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This is merely one of countless examples which show us how the NGOs permeate our daily life and forge our agenda. In the 1990s, the terms of “third sector” and “civil society” are gaining the worldwide focus. Many people think the civil society is an elixir to every problem that the nation states cannot manage. However, the importance of the civil society is still debatable. To what exactly do we refer when using this term “civil society”? Do we overestimate its magnitude? Does this force undermine the exercise of sovereignty?
To answer these questions, I will seek to define civil society first with a theoretical perspective and an insider’s viewpoint. I agree with all the definitions provided by the book, Civil Society . However, I do prefer to use the term to define a non-political and non-capitalism sector. Second, I will argue that civil society does not replace the states in the strict sense although it’s doubtless overwhelming. NGOs and other non-state actors can achieve many tasks that normal sovereign cannot do today. In this way, I agree that the civil society is complementary to the first and second sectors, but they cannot replace the nation states because they are not created to govern the people.

What is civil society?
While reading Civil Society, it’s striking to me when the author, Michael Edwards, mentions that the term of civil society is regarded to be indistinguishable in ancient times: both refer to a type of political association governing social conflict through the imposition of rules that prevent citizens from hurting one another. I have always thought the civil society is a recent phenomenon, which has only been in existence for two or three decade. Thus, I think it’s essential to understand what civil society we are talking about.
There are many definition and viewpoints regarding this term. According to Michael Edwards, there are mainly three kinds of definition to understand civil society: we can regard civil society as associational life, as the good society or as the public sphere. The first definition comes from Alexis de Tocqueville. This “neo-Tocqueville view” also corresponds to how most people view civil society. Civil society is a part of society distinct form states and markets. It is shaped for the objectives of advancing common interests and facilitating collective action, containing all associations and networks between the family and the state, exclusive of firms. I prefer to use civil society as associational life and as Third Sector because there are some unique features that non-profit organizations (NPO) have and that states and private sectors don’t have.
However, I also believe that NGOs have a more important goal other than providing the community link and services. They are forging public opinions and empowering the people. The existence of civil society allows the society to have different voices and helps to build the channel through which the minority can be heard. As Michael Edwards put it, “civil society is people power writ large.”

The shift of power?
Does the emergence of civil society undermine the nation-states’ effectiveness of control? Do we exaggerate the significance of civil society?
The acceptance of human rights and minority rights, the increasing role of international financial institutions (World Bank and IMF), and globalization have led many people to question the capability of the sovereign state. According to Jessica T. Mathews’ article Power Shift in Foreign Affairs, the absolutes of the Westphalian system are all dissolving. The economic activities and the threats are no longer bounded by the boundaries; the resources and the crimes are right now transnational. The diseases such as SARS and Bird Flu are not stopped by the borders. Although the task of providing security still falls upon the shoulders of the nation states, political entities are sharing powers, inclusive of political, social and even security roles, with corporations, international organizations such as UN and NATO and a lot of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) . Because of the Internet and the lowering telecommunication costs, the world is experiencing dramatic changes and NGOs reach an unprecedented level of influence. Jessica Mathews indicates, “Today NGOs deliver more official development assistance than the entire system.” NGOs such as Oxfam, Greenpeace, Care, WWF and Amnesty International have a bigger annual budget than some agencies of UN system.
I have worked in a research platform, Centre for the Third Sector in National Chengchi University (Taiwan), as a volunteer. While I worked there, I observed many instances which NGOs lobby in the congress and then manage to push forward some changes in the political or legal environment. Working for the NGOs or others voluntary service groups at least for a period of three months becomes a popular choice for young people. In my opinion, another reason why the civil society is so full of vitality is that civil society makes up the disappointment that people face in the political reality. Some people think that civil society does provide services in many areas that the conventional sovereignties cannot supply anymore. In this kind of situation, civil society does fulfill the vacuum where sovereign states don’t enjoy their influence. For example, Oxfam worked with ENDA Tiers Monde, a Senegal-based NGO , to provide legal advice and substantial assistance to seven African countries in negotiating new terms and having more legal standings in Cancun 2003. Why can these countries not underpin their argument on their own? Because the states are not capable of achieving this goal and because there were not enough financial resources or legal experts to solve the case on their own, it’s then the time for NGOs to come in. In this sense, the emergence of civil society is truly eroding the sovereignty.
Nonetheless, Stephen D. Krasner contends that states have never enjoyed as much sovereignty as some have supposed. I also think that civil society is not damaging the states to exert their power and control their people because the civil society is not the formal entities which can conduct international treaties and wars despite its vigor. States are still the only entities which can declare wars, establish formal diplomatic relations and use the force. Heller and Sofaer in Problematic Sovereignty assert that the voluntary actions of limiting states’ power or conceding the power to international organizations are actually not a surrender of the sovereignty but an embodiment of sovereign power.
Michael Edwards mentions that states allow the civil society to develop and moreover states induce the civil society to take a bigger voice because it’s considered to be one important indicator in good governance nowadays. For example, China right now cultivates and subsidizes many NGOs and these kinds of associations have an independent appearance but as a matter of fact they are state-sponsored. I do agree with what Jessica said about China’s oppression of the development of civil society as NGOs are somehow a means for China to defer the criticism. The latest issue of The Economist conducted a survey on philanthropy . More and more millionaires are getting into the business of giving but they use the whole new concept to decide who to be given money. The new donors are becoming much more businesslike about the way their money is used. Although the aurthor of the survey, Matthew Bishop, argues that the new trend might encourage civil society and make a better world to come, I am still suspicious of the idea “social entrepreneurship” promoted by civil society itself. Are NGOs unconsciously becoming the tools of corporations and states? Everyone participates in civil society not only because it’s good for humankind but also because the amplification of civil society is good for his own reputation. Civil society is a phenomenon because people want it to be.

Conclusion
Civil society itself is a debatable term. The neo-Tocquevillian view of civil society is the most popular one, but I also think that civil society is capable of empowering the public and allows the society to be more diverse. Some scholars think that civil society is weakening the basis of “states as single actors” system. It’s true that civil society is emerging and the NGOs can play important roles in international events. However, at the same time, other scholars claim that the sovereignty is not harmed by the dynamism of civil society. People overestimate the significance of civil society and it would perhaps fall into the hands of political and business manipulations.