Contention is political only when claims are public and governmental

Evidence

Contention in general includes any individual’s or group’s making of consequential claims on another individual or group. “Consequential” means the claims would, if realized, affect their object’s interests. You and your spouse may contend over spending money, visiting relatives, cleaning out closets, or any number of other issues. Contention becomes political, however, when the claims are public and collective, at least one of the parties is already a political actor, and a government is at least a party to the claims in the sense that successful pressing of the claims will involve government agents as monitors, regulators, guarantors, or implementers. — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 131

Categorization

  • DEFINE: The core definition of political contention; notes that ‘consequential’ is about interests, not necessarily success.
  • XREF: Feeds the reader’s question: whether dominant-group ‘rights defense’ counts as political contention under this definition (government as guarantor). — connects to: The public and the state are distinct concepts that must not be conflated. — Mark Fisher (edited by Darren Ambrose), K-Punk: The Collected and Unpublished
, 2183; Contentious politics is collective claim-making for power and advantage — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 114; Most public politics involves routine transactions without open contention — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 134 (+7 more)
  • corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 131

Broader Connections