Summary
Lev Grinberg’s analytical concept for the peaceful containment of social conflicts by recognition and representation: a symbolic space of re-presentation of social forces in the political arena, mediated by political actors between the state and civil society, which can be dynamically opened, closed, broadened or shrunk (Moments of Resistance, PDF p.21-22, 36, 39-40).
Details
- Political space is opened to mediate between the state and civil society, and between dominant and dominated social forces, in moments when unilateral repression by the most powerful is ineffective or not viable due to some balance of power between the parties (PDF p.21).
- The symbolic space of representation of subordinated social forces can be opened by recognizing their claims, identities, agendas and representatives, and can be closed or shrunk by the physical or symbolic violence of the dominant elites (PDF p.21-22).
- Its fundamental precondition is the existence of consensual and recognized borders enabling both sides to a conflict to be part of a shared political arena; disputed, blurred or nonexistent borders nurture a particular type of anxiety that leads social forces in conflict to support violence (PDF p.36).
- Political space is not a physical area but a social construct, a symbolic field of representation (Bourdieu 1992) within a specific sphere of power relations, distinct from civil society and the state (Linz and Stepan 1996), framing a dynamic arena of contestation and containment of social conflicts within constantly changing opportunities (PDF p.43-44).
- Unlike Bourdieu’s political field, political space is not autonomous: it is framed by and dependent on the state and civil society, which is why it can suddenly be opened and closed by critical political events, and why civil society organization can remove politicians who disappoint the forces they claim to represent (Cohen and Arato 1994) (PDF p.45-46).
- Democracy institutionalizes the rules of the game that facilitate the dynamic opening of political space, however it might prevent the opening of political space by symbolic non-recognition or misrecognition of subjugated populations, excluding them from the borders of equal citizenship or the legitimate nation (PDF p.36-37).
- The concept differs from political opportunities structure (POS) in focus: POS focuses on opportunities open to civil society movements to mobilize and shape state policies, while political space focuses on the political mediation between civil society and state policies and among different social groups, and on how political actors interpret and re-present social demands, or ignore them to maintain their power positions (PDF p.47).
- Grinberg’s thirty years of progressive research programs behind the concept addressed the puzzle of Israel’s success in closing political space to all subordinated populations while maintaining a democratic image rarely questioned by its citizens or the international community (PDF p.22).
Related pages
Lev Grinberg, Imagined Democracy, Symbolic Violence, Movements of Resistance, Moments of Resistance