Affiliation:
1. Department of Global Studies, University of Aarhus, Denmark
Abstract
Political scholars express concern for the continued resilience of democracy in the face of multiple crises. In times of crisis, social movements articulate grievances and make demands of political leaders and policymakers. In contrast to the wave of pro-democracy movements following the 2008 global financial crash where protesters demanded accountability from elites, mobilization during the COVID-19 pandemic has defied expectations in several key ways. First, the expectation for protesters to mobilize primarily online in the face of the restrictions and risk associated with large gatherings has not been upheld. Instead, we have witnessed widespread “offline” mass protests. Second, despite high mortality rates and significant disparities in the effectiveness of national public health responses, we have not witnessed widespread mobilizations demanding governments do better to protect citizens from the virus. Instead, we have seen two radically different responses: At one extreme, veterans of “pro-democracy” movements have “pivoted,” using their skills and experience to either make up for weak government responses to COVID-19 (Hong Kong) or to reinforce government efforts to contain it (Taiwan). At the other extreme, “antidemocratic” and predominantly far right-wing movements have mobilized against public health measures, circulating COVID negationist and conspiracy messages. Indeed, the political weaponization of disinformation has been a notable feature of pandemic mobilization. I analyze these contrasting trends, highlighting the challenges they pose for the effective handling of the pandemic, and their broader implications for democratic legitimacy and resilience. In so doing, I call attention to the ways that mobilization during the pandemic challenges scholars to revisit some of our assumptions about the dynamics of social movements in times of crisis, and how they can foster or erode democracy. The analysis also suggests that scholars analyzing the impact of information disorders on democracy need to pay careful attention to offline protest as well as online transmission.
Subject
General Social Sciences,Sociology and Political Science,Education,Cultural Studies,Social Psychology
Reference99 articles.
1. Agius C., Rosamond A. B., Kinnvall C. (2020). Populism, ontological insecurity and gendered nationalism: Masculinity, climate denial and Covid-19. Politics, Religion & Ideology, 21(4), 432–450. https://doi.org/10.1080/21567689.2020.1851871
2. Argentino M-A. (2020). Conspiracy pilled: The growing public health threat posed by conspiracy theories and disinformation, Concordia Research Blog, December 22. https://www.concordia.ca/cunews/offices/vprgs/sgs/public-scholars-20/2020/12/22/conspiracy-pilled.html
3. Artiga S., Orgera K., Pham O., Corallo B. (2020). Growing data underscore that communities of color are being harder hit by COVID-19, KFF Policy Watch, April 21. https://www.kff.org/policy-watch/growing-data-underscore-communities-color-harder-hit-covid-19/
4. Barrett P., Chen S. (2021). Social repercussions of pandemics (IMF Working Papers). https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2021/01/29/Social-Repercussions-of-Pandemics-50041
5. BBC News (2020, April 24). Coronavirus: Outcry after Trump suggests injecting disinfectant as treatment. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-52407177
Cited by
9 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献