Advertisement

Activist Citizenship and the Dramaturgy of Social Change

  • Thomas Tufte
Chapter
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Communication for Social Change book series (PSCSC)

Abstract

This chapter addresses two issues: Firstly, in considering the Gezi uprising as one of many recent uprisings seen across the globe, the nature of contemporary citizen engagement is explored. Isin’s concept of ‘activist citizenship’ is the point of departure (Isin 2009). Isin emphasizes that activist citizenship opens up to an understanding of social change emphasizing the creative, proactive enactment of social actors. Secondly is explored the connection between short-term mobilization and long-term social change. Uprisings are not stand-alone occurrences and by exploring Gezi Park from the perspective of social movement theory, recognizing and incorporating reflections about the role of social media in social movement, the notion of ‘dramaturgy of social change’ is proposed as an analytical approach to capture the dynamics of an activist citizenship. The urgency as well as the deeper societal challenges of political matters are unveiled.

Keywords

Activism Citizenship Citizen engagement Dramaturgy Glocal movements Social change Transnational networking 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The sections about ‘dramaturgy of social change’ in the second half of this chapter have appeared in an earlier version in Thomas Tufte (2017): Communication and Social ChangeA Citizen Perspective. Cambridge: Polity.

References

  1. Arendt, Hannah. 1958. The Human Condition. Chicago; London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  2. Cammaert, Bart. 2012. ‘Protest Logics and the Mediation Opportunity Structure.’ European Journal of Communication 27 (2): 117–34.Google Scholar
  3. Cammaerts, B., and C. Jiménez-Martínez. 2014. The Mediation of the Brazilian V-for-Vinegar Protests: From Vilification to Legitimization and Back? │ A Mediação Dos Protestos Brasileiros ‘V-de-Vinagre’: Da Vilificação à Legitimação E de Volta? Liinc Em Revista 10 (1). doi: 10.18225/liinc.v10i1.697.
  4. Diaz, R. 2014. From the North to the South, from the East to the West—Democracy and Transnational Networks of ‘indignados’ Global Dynamics Seminar. Roskilde University.Google Scholar
  5. Isin, E.F. 2009. Citizenship in Flux: The Figure of the Activist Citizen. Subjectivity 29: 367–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ocal, A. 2016. La revolución no será televisada sino tweeteada: Gezi y sus reflejos en internet. In Activismo digital y nuevos modos de ciudadanía. Una mirada global, ed. Jose Candon Mena and Lucia Benitez Eyzaguirre, 199–215. Barcelona: InCom/UAB.Google Scholar
  7. Ogan, C., I.G. Roya, and L. d’Haenens. 2016. The Relationship between Online and Offline Participation in a Social Movement. In Taking the Square. Mediated Dissent and Occupations of Public Space, ed. M. Rovisco, and J. Corpus Ong. London: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
  8. McDonald, K. 2006. Global Movements: Action and Culture. Malden, MA; Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  9. Melucci, A. 1996. Challenging Codes: Collective Action in the Information Age. Cambridge Cultural Social Studies. Cambridge (New York): Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Melucci, A., J. Keane, and P. Mier. 1989. Nomads of the Present: Social Movements and Individual Needs in Contemporary Society. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Tilly, C. 2008. Contentious Performances. Cambridge Studies in Contentious Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Tufte, T. 2017. Communication and Social Change—A Citizen Perspective. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  13. Wagner, R., and J. Dankova. 2016. The CSO’s Shrinking and Closing Space Tendency—How EU Institutions can Support CSOs Worldwide, 7 April. Heinrich Boll Stiftung.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of LeicesterEnglandUK

Personalised recommendations