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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | American journal of political science 2019-10, Vol.63 (4), p.875-887 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
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 |