Discursive Exit

Some women did not participate in the Women's March, rejecting its claims of unity and solidarity because white women mobilize only in their self-interest This is a form of exit with three features: (1) rejecting a political claim; (2) providing reasons to the power wielder and the broader publ...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:American journal of political science 2019-10, Vol.63 (4), p.875-887
1. Verfasser: Montanaro, Laura
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Some women did not participate in the Women's March, rejecting its claims of unity and solidarity because white women mobilize only in their self-interest This is a form of exit with three features: (1) rejecting a political claim; (2) providing reasons to the power wielder and the broader public; and (3) demanding accountability both as sanction and as deliberation, which requires a discussion about the claim—in this case, the meaning of the group and the terms on which it understands itself. This combination of exit, voice, and deliberative accountability might accurately be called "discursive exit" Discursive exit addresses conceptual and normative limitations of standard accounts of exit, voice, and loyalty, in particular, when exit and voice are imperfect—because exit can be seen as disapproval of an entire cause—and morally problematic—because voice "from within" implies that cause trumps disagreement, leaving people morally complicit in an unwelcome exercise of power.
ISSN:0092-5853
1540-5907
DOI:10.1111/ajps.12463