Vicissitudes of emotions and political action during the Greek crisis

apostolos — Mon, 04 May 2020 23:24:02 +0000

Action readiness is considered a central property of emotions in most psychological theories. Emotions are the engine of behavior. They are the motivating, directing, prioritizing function of the brain, and impel to an immediate reaction to challenges and opportunities faced by the organism. Nevertheless, under sociopolitical malaise, emotions do not always lead to action. People leave in societies characterized by particular emotional cultures, climates, and atmospheres that set the background to what emotions are felt under which circumstances. The impact of an emotion depends on how relevant, that is, emotionally significant is the event for the individual; on the implications of the event for the person’s well-being and immediate or long-term goals; on the individual’s capacity to cope with or adjust to the consequences of the event; and on the significance of the event with respect to individual and collective self-concept and to social norms and values. Although emotions trigger action, events with high emotional intensity may mobilize defense mechanisms that distort facts, so that the event may appear distant or not concerning the individual personally. In such cases action is hindered because the meaning of the emotive event, although fully intellectually understood, does not have personal emotional reality. If the defense mechanisms prove inefficient or collapse, the event may be experienced as traumatic, that is, as a shocking occurrence that brings about a rupture in the continuity of existence, numbing of senses and mental faculties, and inability to think about what happened for periods that may last from days to years, although individuals and collectives may appear quite normal in carrying out everyday routines. Interpretative “emotion work” in formal or informal contexts may change emotions from immobilizing to mobilizing, or from destructive to constructive, as the traumatic event is being “worked through” and a cohesive narrative about it develops. But even then, action and in our case, political action, depends on the individual’s available repertoire—political efficacy and resilience—built up from past recoveries and a sense of support from social networks, and hope in assessing the costs and benefits from the harms brought by acting and the harms brought by non-acting.

Why Greeks rebel: Re-examining conventional and radical political action

apostolos — Tue, 16 Apr 2019 22:25:50 +0000

Recent years have witnessed a rise of contentious political activity across the world heralding what some perceive as a new major cycle of protest. Much attention has focused on Europe, where the economic crisis generated considerable social unrest deemed comparable to earlier waves of protest. This article seeks to examine the basic constituents of the social forces unleashed by this economic crisis and to assess the main motivations driving this new cycle of protest. It distinguishes between conventional and radical political activity and seeks to identify the main correlates of each. The article uses an original telephone survey designed, piloted, and conducted in Greece (n = 5025) to construct a 12-item conventionalism scale and a 10-item radicalism scale. Using psychometric techniques, it assesses the effects of various independent variables on the two modes of political action. The article finds that, even in this economic crisis-hit setting, economic deprivation has a minimal effect on the two modes of behavior. Ideology, especially on the left of the political spectrum, has the strongest effect on both radical and conventional political action. Despite the major changes in the political context brought about by the economic crisis, political action displays significant continuity with the past.

Political action – To Archeio

Vicissitudes of emotions and political action during the Greek crisis

Why Greeks rebel: Re-examining conventional and radical political action