Disrupting Democracy

Democratization conflicts as performative struggles

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

This article looks at disruptive political performance in the context of democratic transition. Disruptions take ownership of and re-present the past to evaluate and contest established forms of power in the post-transitional present. They thereby potentially engender conflict that can redirect the future path to consolidation. An illustrative case is the radical opposition party Economic Freedom Fighters’ (EFF’s) disruption of the South African State of the Nation Address in 2015, which descended into violence. The author adopts a mixed-methods approach that prioritizes interpretive analysis and thick description. An analysis of videos of the disruptive performance in parliament is complemented by investigation of its media coverage and the real-time public reaction on Twitter. She finds that the form of the performance engenders conflict; but performance is also its subject, for it seeks to expose the vacuum of democratic substance behind the regime’s masquerade of power. While the disruptive performance therefore serves an important accountability function, it simultaneously sets a problematic course for future democratic transition as it performs this function through moral essentialism. The South African case presents a particular type of disruption with specific functions and democratic implications. But it also demonstrates that a concern with the formal aspects of performance in general is a fruitful lens for considering the relation between observable form in processes of meaning-making, its political functions and the democratic change it can effect.
Original languageEnglish
JournalMedia, War and Conflict
Early online date27 Aug 2019
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 27 Aug 2019

Fingerprint

democratization
democracy
performance
Consolidation
political function
Lenses
twitter
present
Vacuum
parliament
consolidation
Economics
Democratization
Democracy
opposition
video
coverage
regime
violence
responsibility

Cite this

@article{ca19e041ba77483dbb92a121e3e76aad,
title = "Disrupting Democracy: Democratization conflicts as performative struggles",
abstract = "This article looks at disruptive political performance in the context of democratic transition. Disruptions take ownership of and re-present the past to evaluate and contest established forms of power in the post-transitional present. They thereby potentially engender conflict that can redirect the future path to consolidation. An illustrative case is the radical opposition party Economic Freedom Fighters’ (EFF’s) disruption of the South African State of the Nation Address in 2015, which descended into violence. The author adopts a mixed-methods approach that prioritizes interpretive analysis and thick description. An analysis of videos of the disruptive performance in parliament is complemented by investigation of its media coverage and the real-time public reaction on Twitter. She finds that the form of the performance engenders conflict; but performance is also its subject, for it seeks to expose the vacuum of democratic substance behind the regime’s masquerade of power. While the disruptive performance therefore serves an important accountability function, it simultaneously sets a problematic course for future democratic transition as it performs this function through moral essentialism. The South African case presents a particular type of disruption with specific functions and democratic implications. But it also demonstrates that a concern with the formal aspects of performance in general is a fruitful lens for considering the relation between observable form in processes of meaning-making, its political functions and the democratic change it can effect.",
keywords = "democratization, disruption, political communication, political performance, South Africa",
author = "Lone Sorensen",
year = "2019",
month = "8",
day = "27",
doi = "10.1177/1750635219870225",
language = "English",
journal = "Media, War and Conflict",
issn = "1750-6352",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Disrupting Democracy

T2 - Democratization conflicts as performative struggles

AU - Sorensen, Lone

PY - 2019/8/27

Y1 - 2019/8/27

N2 - This article looks at disruptive political performance in the context of democratic transition. Disruptions take ownership of and re-present the past to evaluate and contest established forms of power in the post-transitional present. They thereby potentially engender conflict that can redirect the future path to consolidation. An illustrative case is the radical opposition party Economic Freedom Fighters’ (EFF’s) disruption of the South African State of the Nation Address in 2015, which descended into violence. The author adopts a mixed-methods approach that prioritizes interpretive analysis and thick description. An analysis of videos of the disruptive performance in parliament is complemented by investigation of its media coverage and the real-time public reaction on Twitter. She finds that the form of the performance engenders conflict; but performance is also its subject, for it seeks to expose the vacuum of democratic substance behind the regime’s masquerade of power. While the disruptive performance therefore serves an important accountability function, it simultaneously sets a problematic course for future democratic transition as it performs this function through moral essentialism. The South African case presents a particular type of disruption with specific functions and democratic implications. But it also demonstrates that a concern with the formal aspects of performance in general is a fruitful lens for considering the relation between observable form in processes of meaning-making, its political functions and the democratic change it can effect.

AB - This article looks at disruptive political performance in the context of democratic transition. Disruptions take ownership of and re-present the past to evaluate and contest established forms of power in the post-transitional present. They thereby potentially engender conflict that can redirect the future path to consolidation. An illustrative case is the radical opposition party Economic Freedom Fighters’ (EFF’s) disruption of the South African State of the Nation Address in 2015, which descended into violence. The author adopts a mixed-methods approach that prioritizes interpretive analysis and thick description. An analysis of videos of the disruptive performance in parliament is complemented by investigation of its media coverage and the real-time public reaction on Twitter. She finds that the form of the performance engenders conflict; but performance is also its subject, for it seeks to expose the vacuum of democratic substance behind the regime’s masquerade of power. While the disruptive performance therefore serves an important accountability function, it simultaneously sets a problematic course for future democratic transition as it performs this function through moral essentialism. The South African case presents a particular type of disruption with specific functions and democratic implications. But it also demonstrates that a concern with the formal aspects of performance in general is a fruitful lens for considering the relation between observable form in processes of meaning-making, its political functions and the democratic change it can effect.

KW - democratization

KW - disruption

KW - political communication

KW - political performance

KW - South Africa

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85071647300&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1750635219870225

DO - 10.1177/1750635219870225

M3 - Article

JO - Media, War and Conflict

JF - Media, War and Conflict

SN - 1750-6352

ER -