Nonviolent Political Action and the Limits of Consent

Bibliographic Data

ID10830201
AuthorsIain Atack (0000-0001-9139-8795)
Year2006
Volume53
Issue111
Publication date2006-01-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueTHEORIA An International Journal for Theory History and Foundations of Science (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0495-4548 • E-ISSN: 2171-679X
PublisherBerghahn Books (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.3167/004058106780446449
OpenAlexW2103895195
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited6

The consent theory of power, whereby ruling elites depend ultimately on the submission, cooperation and obedience of the governed as their source of power, is often linked to debates about the effectiveness of non-violent political action. According to this theory, ruling elites depend ultimately on the submission, cooperation and obedience of the governed as their source of power. If this cooperation is with-drawn, then this power is undermined. Iain Atack outlines this theory and examines its strengths and weaknesses. Atack argues that incorporating the insights of other theories of power, such as Gramsci's theory of hegemony and Foucault's views on 'micro-power', can provide us with a more sophisticated understanding of both the effectiveness and the limits of nonviolent political action than the consent theory of power. Gramsci's contribution deepens the analysis in terms of our understanding of the origins of individual consent in the context of larger economic and political structures, while Foucault adds a different dimension, in that his micro-approach emphasizes the ubiquity and plurality of power, rather than its embodiment or reification in large-scale structures

Action (physics · Context (archaeology · Epistemology · Hegemony · Law and economics · Obedience · Political philosophy · Political science · Politics · Power (physics · Reification (Marxism · Sociology · Critical Theory and Philosophy · Foucault, Power, and Ethics · Law · Philosophy · Political theory and Gramsci

Tools

Open DOI