In this presentation, Visualising Peace student Kim Wahnke discusses the connections made between environmentalism, peace and politics in interdisciplinary scholarship. This is part of her wider research into discourses of peace within democratic politics. She is interested in how peaceful (or not) electoral processes tend to be, what attention political campaigns pay to peace and peace-building, and how closely linked democracy and peace are (or are not) in different contexts. Below the video, you can find a summary of the publications she discusses. These are also available in our Visualising Peace Library.
Sofia Collignon, Wolfgang Rüdig. 2020. “Harassment and Intimidation of Parliamentary Candidates in the United Kingdom” https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1467-923X.12855
The article examines the peacefulness of British elections by reviewing the volume, nature and methods of harassment towards British MPs. Around 4/10 candidates reported repeated harassment throughout the 2015 electoral campaign. The different varieties of harassment ranged from improper communications (often through social media or e-Mail) to people loitering in front of homes or sexual harassment. Throughout all these forms of harassment, the common pattern was a higher frequency of abuse for female, young and leading candidates, especially amongst the Conservative party. Multiple forms of harassment mentioned above come together in affecting candidates physically and emotionally, sometimes even leading to them stepping down from their jobs. Aggression is becoming a prominent part of electoral politics in Britain, further increased by polarisation through Brexit. A conclusion taken by the author is that being able to stand for office in elections with guaranteed personal safety, no matter what political opinions are expressed, is not guaranteed in current British politics. The peacefulness of elections and of the electoral atmosphere is greatly undermined by aggressiveness towards political candidates. Furthermore, the patterns of aggression target more vulnerable groups, undermining an inclusive political discussion.
Michael Karlberg. 2005. “The power of discourse and the discourse of power: pursuing peace through discourse intervention.” https://www.jstor.org/stable/41852070
This article examines ‘discourse intervention’ as a way of changing current modes of interaction with power in democratic settings. The author critiques Western perceptions of power for focusing primarily on adversarial power relations and perceiving power in terms of “power as domination”. It underlines how problematic it is to obscure mutualistic power relations, which the author then examines through feminist and systems-based models of power. Because a Western one-dimensional understanding of power is the basis of our societal organisation model, a “culture of contest” has been created, leading to insufficient social and ecological sustainability. The authors show that in order to advance peacebuilding, discourses of power must be reviewed to change its application in the economic, political, social and cultural sphere. An example of new models of social organisation and attitudes towards power is the Baha’i community. Here, power is viewed as cooperative interdependence and reciprocity, making elections non-partisan and non-competitive; decisions are also taken through communal consultative processes. The critique of dominant power models and their lack of sustainability include their lack of peace-building possibilities; competitiveness in all aspects of society make reconciliation and cooperation more difficult. Even in seemingly peace-furthering mechanisms like elections, competition is valued over cooperation; the Baha’i present a counter-model to this.
Michael Bruter, Sarah Harrison. 2020. “Electoral Resolution and Atmosphere / From hope to hostility” (chapter 9). https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9780691202013-011/html
Reflecting on recent electoral developments, that have led to a lack of straightforward majorities and shifts in traditional alliances, the authors examine whether elections still reduce conflicts within society by giving voters temporary closure and a sense of democratic resolution. Using multiple case studies across France, the UK and the US, the authors measure “electoral atmosphere”, finding high degrees of negativity as well as emotional and personal attachments, especially by the end of the election cycle. According to the authors, elections usually provide satisfaction with the democratic process and reconciliation, not only for those whose electoral preferences have been vindicated. But this phenomenon, the “electoral honeymoon,” has been declining since the late 2010s, leading to an increasingly personal perception of other voters and more electoral hostility. This coincides with the rise in populist voting; elections are less likely to bring a sense of resolution concerning incompatible sets of values and desired futures, especially where the ideas of the other are seen as illegitimate. This leads to voters no longer feeling closure after elections and the danger of them not feeling bound by the outcomes of democratic processes. This can be seen as a grave danger for peaceful living in democratic societies as well as something that must be actively tackled in order to further the effects of inner peace on the electorate.