Ann Mische

Composing a civic arena: Publics, projects, and social settings

Abstract In this paper, we analyze the sociocultural mechanisms by which diverse and contending actors construct a ‘civic’ arena in a fractured, contentious, and multi-sectoral political field. We do this through a case study of the convergence of the 1992 Brazilian impeachment movement, which led to the impeachment on corruption charges of President Fernando Collor de Melo. First, we propose a conceptual reformulation of the notion of a ‘civic arena’, based upon the proposition that relationships within political fields are structured by discursive as well as organizational ties, as these are activated over time within particular social settings. Second, we introduce a formal methodology for analyzing the sociocultural structuring of this arena, building upon the algebraic technique of ‘Galois’ or ‘concept’ lattices. We apply the simpler form of lattice analysis — bipartite lattices — to analyze the duality of relations among organizations and their projects. We then incorporate temporality into the analysis by using a new extension of lattice analysis — tripartite lattices — to show the three-way interpenetration among organizations, projects, and events. We argue that this analysis reveals three distinct stages involved in civic coalition formation, as organizations move from sectoral segmentation to cross-sectoral intermingling and finally, civic convergence. These stages, in turn, involve two interrelated sociocultural mechanisms, which we describe as the interanimation and suppression of projects at public events.

SPOTLIGHT: Distrust in democracy: complex civic networks and the case of Brazil

Trust is only one of the types of ties generated by social networks, and arguably not the most important in generating access to the state. The term “trust networks” usually refers to social formations characterized by homophily, strong ties, and dense network clustering, which generate the identities and commitments underlying mobilization and civic life. Yet the social networks literature also notes the importance of weak or “bridging” ties that span network enclaves and link heterogeneous and contending sets of actors. I argue that it is often distrust, rather than trust, that serves as the vehicle of integration of non-state actors into the democratic polity, via the intersection of partisan and civic engagement. When this is absent we run the risk of state-society relations characterized by clientelism, quiescence, stagnation and balkanization. Using the case of Brazil in the 1980s and 90s, I argue that a healthy democracy depends not just upon the integration of trust-based enclaves into the state – the historical source of corporatist politics – but upon complex civic and partisan networks in which contending institutional logics cross-cut and inform each other. While these may generate conflict and tensions, they are also the source of the institutional innovation, contestation, and engagement with state politics that a strong and resilient democracy requires.