In Defense of ‘Mobilization’

• In Event: Democracy and Unequal Power: Causes, Consequences, and Solutions

Abstract

This paper aims to change the terms of a debate that discredits mass voters as the weak point in contemporary democracy. I defend a “mobilization” conception of political representation as a counter to the preeminent model of interest representation which I argue sets mass democracy up to fail by virtue of adhering to a unidirectional model of responsiveness that has no empirical warrant. I use the term “mobilization” differently than political scientists for whom it names the activities that political parties and other organization undertake to raise electoral turnout by targeting people’s partisan identities. I do not attach to “mobilization” the negative connotations it has taken on when it gets juxtaposed against “organizing” in the otherwise very compelling work about the institution-building strategies of civil society associations such as labor unions and advocacy organizations (McAlevy; Han). I argue that a “primordialism” (Brubaker) about groups haunts these various uses of the term, which this paper undertakes to reclaim “mobilization” for a conception of democratic representation in which plurality takes precedence over citizen competence as modern democracy’s most important requisite.

Author

• Lisa J. Disch, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor