“Taking the State at Its Word”: The Arts of Consentful Contention in the German Democratic Republic

Abstract

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org..

Women's human rights in Russia: outmoded battlegrounds, or new sites of contentious politics?

“…Here, the author draws on the framework of "consentful" forms of contention (Straughn 2005). To discuss why some women may reject contentious feminist forms of protest, even when grievances are based on gender inequality and discrimination.…”

“…Drawing on the contentious politics framework (see the introduction to this issue; Koesel and Bunce 2012), this article analyses different forms of women's rights activism based on extensive research over the last 10 years. This article calls for a more nuanced and detailed discussion of the opportunity structures for both "consentful" and "overt" contention (Staggenborg and Taylor 2005;Straughn 2005; O'Brien 2013), thus drawing on more critical theorisations of contentious politics that move beyond a narrow focus on social movements and overt public forms of protest.…”

“…In his study of citizens' claims against the state under socialism in the German Democratic Republic, Straughn (2005) describes "consentful contention" as acts of contention that need not appear overtly oppositional, and may even be framed in the terms the regime uses itself (see introduction and Catherine Owen's contribution to this volume). In my research on women's perceptions of and access to human rights conducted in 2005 (see Turbine 2007 for further details), the women interviewed were generally not demanding regime change, nor necessarily saw themselves as political activists.…”

State–society relations in contemporary Russia: new forms of political and social contention

“…For Jeremy Straughn (2005Straughn ( , 1611, social action varies along behavioural and motivational axes. He notes that "standpoints" (motivations) can range from consentful to dissentful and that behaviour varies from compliant to contentious.…”

“…In particular, White's contribution shows how the street rather than the legislature has become the "natural habitat" for "dissentful contention", with the onus thus put on (as yet rudimentary) attempts to co-ordinate a hitherto "un-organised civil society" which has exceedingly poor links to the intra-systemic "political society". With similarities to the Soviet era, it is generally more productive for citizens to avoid dissentful contention altogether and utilise the possibility of presenting claims while simultaneously maintaining "the persona of a dutiful citizen" (Straughn 2005(Straughn , 1601. For instance, Bindman shows that, whereas the relationship between human rights NGOs and the state is often antagonistically dissentfully contentious, for the "social" NGOs the relationship is "complex, nuanced and mutually constitutive", usually varying between consentful contention (pressing the authorities to honour their constitutional commitments as a "social state") and consentful compliance (not critiquing the "social state" repertoire but recognising that co-operation with the state is the most effective way to "get things done").…”