Advertisement

Understanding Power: Communicating Resistance

  • Padmaja ShawEmail author
Chapter
  • 9 Downloads

Abstract

Electoral politics in India has become a signifier of democracy to the exclusion of all other values expected of a fair and just political system. In the political jostle for power, there is a disconnect between the “will of the people”, and the majoritarian outcomes arrived at through electoral math. Indian polity, since independence, was characterized by a rich tapestry of political contestation ranging from extreme right to extreme left, with the centre-left of Nehruvian ideology in power till the mid-1980s. Though contested deeply, the constitutional values of free speech and association formed the base for political contestation. Following the globalization project and the liberalization of the economy in 1990s, the political centre of gravity began to shift rightward, delegitimizing left of centre politics. The political spectrum that is on the ascendant is from far right to centre-right with the left and centre-left politics attacked as anti-national. The political discourse is no longer within the bounds of constitutional values of free speech and free association. Corporate media and social media play a central role in shrinking the space for dissent in an effort to limit the range of political discourse to centre-right and far right, erasing all non-right discourse from the public sphere. There are counter-narratives attempting to challenge this hegemony, through newer strategies of resistance to power. This chapter argues that if justice and equality for all are accepted as the basic principles of democracy, the existing spaces for dissent and debate must be defended and expanded. A majority vote in periodical elections is no indicator of a robust democracy.

Keywords

Democracy Agonism Media Social media Electoral politics Counter-narratives Fascism 

References

  1. Bansal, S., & Garimella, K. (2019, March 5). Fighting fake news: Decoding ‘fact-free’ world of WhatsApp. Hindustan Times. https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/decoding-fact-free-world-of-whatsapp/story-LQ79X96OOKrGo7MHuW3TMP.html. Accessed 1 September 2019.
  2. Business Standard. (2019, April 5). Ruling BJP got 95% of funds: Why there’s an uproar over electoral bonds. https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/ruling-bjp-bags-95-of-funds-why-there-s-an-uproar-over-electoral-bonds-119040500309_1.html. Accessed 8 September 2019.
  3. Busk, M. (2001). Micropolitics: A political philosophy from Marx and beyond. In P. Pisters (Ed.), Micropolitics of media culture: Reading the Rhizomes of Deleuze and Guattari (p. 117). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Deleuze, G. (1990, October). Postscript on the societies of control, 59 (Winter), 3–7. https://www.jstor.org/stable/778828. Accessed 14 July 2019.
  5. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (2013). A thousand plateaus. New York: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  6. Economic Times Online. (2018, November 30). Why the farmers have stormed Delhi, what they want. Economic Times. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/et-explains/why-the-farmers-have-stormed-delhi-what-they-want/articleshow/66881527.cms?from=mdr. Accessed 29 August 2019.
  7. Foucault, M. (1995). Discipline and punish. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
  8. Inamdar, N. (2019, March 12). How Narendra Modi has almost killed the Indian media. Quartz. https://qz.com/india/1570899/how-narendra-modi-has-almost-killed-indian-media/. Accessed 10 September 2019.
  9. Intellectuals and Power: A Conversation Between Michael Foucault and Gilles Deleuze. (1972). http://libcom.org/library/intellectuals-power-a-conversation-between-michel-foucault-and-gilles-deleuze. Accessed 27 June 2019.
  10. Interview with Chantal Mouffe. (2006, December). Hegemony, democracy, agonism and journalism. Journalism Studies, 7(6), 971. http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/3020/1/Hegemony,_democracy,_agonism_and_journalism_(LSERO).pdf. Accessed 12 July 2019.
  11. Laclau, E. (2000). Power and social communication. Ethical Perspectives, 142. http://www.ethicalperspectives.be/viewpic.php?LAN=E&TABLE=EP&ID=138. Accessed 15 September 2019.
  12. Laclau, E. (2001). Democracy and question of Power. Constellations, 8 (1), 7.Google Scholar
  13. Laclau, E. (2005). On populist reason (p. 164). London: Verso.Google Scholar
  14. Lefort, C. (1988). The question of democracy. In Democracy and political theory (pp. 9–20). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  15. Mahurkar, U., & Pradhan, K. (2014, May 19). Maximum campaign: Modi unleashes a blitzkrieg never seen before in Indian electoral history. India Today. https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/cover-story/story/20140519-narendra-modi-bjp-campaign-indian-electoral-history-lok-sabha-elections-2014-802633-1999-11-30. Accessed 11 September 2019.
  16. Mouffe, C. (2000). The democratic paradox. New York: Verso.Google Scholar
  17. Mouffe, C. (2016). Democratic politics and conflict: An agonistic approach. Política común (Vol. 9). http://dx.doi.org/10.3998/pc.12322227.0009.011. Accessed 12 July 2019.
  18. Pitkin, H. F. (1972). The concept of representation (pp. 106–107). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  19. Prasad, K. (2019, June 14). Democracy can die in day-light too. The Hindu. https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/democracy-can-die-in-daylight-too/article27902292.ece Accessed 1 September 2019.
  20. Rukmini, S. (2014, May 8). Modi got most prime-time coverage. The Hindu. https://www.thehindu.com/elections/loksabha2014/Modi-got-most-prime-time-coverage-study/article11639092.ece. Accessed 1 September 2019.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Communication and Journalism, College of Arts and Social SciencesOsmania UniversityHyderabadIndia

Personalised recommendations