{"id":2666,"date":"2015-11-04T14:48:19","date_gmt":"2015-11-04T14:48:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/literaturkunstmedien.wordpress.com\/?p=2666"},"modified":"2015-11-04T14:48:19","modified_gmt":"2015-11-04T14:48:19","slug":"2666","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lkm.uni-konstanz.de\/news\/2666\/","title":{"rendered":"Workshop: Symbolic Politics of Non-Representation in Contemporary Cultures of Dissent 20\/21. November 2015 in der BIschofsvilla"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Symbolic<\/a><\/p>\n

With the so-called Arab Spring and Occupy, but also with the German PEGIDA, a seemingly new
\ntransnational wave of dissent movements has arisen. What we consider new in these movements is
\ntheir constitution as a heterogeneous multitude based on physical presence, temporarily gathering
\nan otherwise highly diverse population. As much as these groups appear united concerning their
\nshared enemy \u2013 namely political and economic elites \u2013 as well as with regard to the name in which
\nthey act (\u201cthe people\u201d), they remain of inner dissent insofar as they put the possibility of an
\noverarching identity of the movement into question. What we witness, hence, is the dissolution of
\nthe belief in traditional emancipatory movements united by class, gender or ethnicity standing up
\nagainst a hegemonic regime and its substitution by the hope for the subversive and revolutionary
\npotential of a post-identitarian counter-public performing their being-in-difference. Yet, their ability
\nof representing \u201cthe people\u201d seems to disappear in spite of the proposed inclusiveness and
\nmultivocality, as their radical dissent leads to non-representation: They refuse to traditionally
\nrepresent \u201cthe people\u201d by making claims or engaging in formulating positions.
\nAt the same time, these protest movements certainly stand and fall with the production of symbolic
\npolitics likely to be disseminated via social media sites, newspapers and TV or radio broadcasts .
\nPierre Bourdieu had already noted that the success of mobilisations depended on the existence of a
\n\u201csymbolic apparatus\u201d for the production of epistemological claims about the world \u2013 a fait social
\nthat becomes even more decisive regarding the organisational ephemerality of current movements.
\nTaking this changing notion of political movements with their underlying anti -hierarchical,
\nnon-representational, fragile and network-based logic as a starting point, the workshop aims at
\ncritically investigating current formulations of dissent by specifically broaching the issue of the
\n(im)possibility of representing the unrepresentable. By doing so we evidently focus on the so -called
\ncrisis of representation but aim at enlarging this debate to those intentionally organising to
\n\u201cdisrepresent\u201d representation.
\nEngaging this problematic, the following question may serve as our starting points:
\nHow is non-representation performed on the streets, for the mass media or in more intimate
\nsettings?
\nWhich symbol practices are employed and to what extent are they grounded in narratives of earlier
\nprotests or resistances (e.g. the altermondialist movements of the 1990s, the uprisings in French
\nbanlieues in 2005-2007, or the riots in the UK in 2011)?
\nHow do these practices connect to current discussions of direct democracy (e.g. David Graeber\u2019s
\nthoughts on anarchist anthropology in the wake of Occupy)?
\nCan we discern national, social, cultural or gendered lineages that contain (and maybe limit) these
\nnarrative and aesthetic forms?<\/p>\n

Workshop_SymbolicPolitics_Programme<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

With the so-called Arab Spring and Occupy, but also with the German PEGIDA, a seemingly new transnational wave of dissent…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":6,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_stc_notifier_status":"","_stc_notifier_sent_time":"","_stc_notifier_request":false,"_stc_notifier_prevent":false,"_stc_subscriber_keywords":"","_stc_subscriber_search_areas":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2666","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lkm.uni-konstanz.de\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2666","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lkm.uni-konstanz.de\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lkm.uni-konstanz.de\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lkm.uni-konstanz.de\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/6"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lkm.uni-konstanz.de\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2666"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.lkm.uni-konstanz.de\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2666\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lkm.uni-konstanz.de\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2666"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lkm.uni-konstanz.de\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2666"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lkm.uni-konstanz.de\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2666"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}