This article suggests a new perspective on the political signification of riots, using the 2011 England riots as a case. The sociological literature tends to look for the political signification of riots in the riots themselves. Drawing on Michel Foucault’s notion of the dispositive, the article develops a new approach that analyses the optical grids in which riots are made visible as objects for thought and action that can be either political or apolitical. By analysing the case of the 2011 England riots, the article shows how the dispositives that made the riots visible make it possible to ascribe a both obscure and radical political signification to the riots. The article opens up a new line of inquiry about the relation between riots and politics, and allows us to reconsider the political signification of riots.
Contention in the form of protests, riots, and direct action is a central political practice in contemporary democracies. It is also a staple of sociological analysis, after slowly crystallizing as a distinct object of analysis from the 1970s onward. Lately, however, it has become unclear what this distinctiveness consists of and how it may help guide studies of contention: What distinguishes contention from other practices? I argue that contention can be seen as an ontologically distinctive experience. What sets this experience apart is that it expresses a potential for conflict that underlies all social formations. We can take these expressions of conflict as objects of analysis. This means asking how the conflict expressed in contentious practices is ascribed meaning. I develop this perspective theoretically and show how it may facilitate new empirical analyses of contention’s boundaries, its relation to truth, and ethical relations in contention.
How is political contention constituted as an intelligible political practice, distinct from mere social disorders? This article gets at the question by analysing the relation between protests and riots at the turn of the 19th century in England. Drawing on Michel Foucault’s discussion of visibilities and post-foundational political theory, it contrasts the 1760s Wilkes and Liberty agitations with that of the London Corresponding Society in the 1790s. It articulates two ways of configuring the relation and constituting political contention in the self-governing practices of contentious actors. In the first case, political contention is an exercise of public spirit that may include riots and is opposed to passivity or factional interest. In the second, it is a process of public inquiry premised on a constitutive exclusion of riots. The comparison reveals how the emergence of protest politics also resulted in a new way of delineating and constituting political contention. In this way, it offers a new perspective on the contemporary constitution of political contention.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.