Direct collective refusal reveals the contingency of official power.

Evidence

Before this event, Buttonwillow residents did not question the Board Chair’s power and their own powerlessness. When Buttonwillow residents refused to sit down during the Supervisors’ hearing, they had the experience of feeling their own power, and also experiencing the powerlessness of the Chair of the Board. They understood the contingency of the Board Chair’s power in that situation. They reconstructed the power relations of the situation—albeit slightly—to give themselves more power. — Luke W. Cole and Sheila R. Foster, From the Ground Up, 435

Categorization

• SEED: A dimension of protest pedagogy: what nonviolent civil disobedience teaches participants about power’s contingency—could pair with Freire-style conscientization discussions in eco-justice pedagogy.
• XREF: connects to: A direct act of protest can backfire by suppressing further testimony. — Luke W. Cole and Sheila R. Foster, From the Ground Up: Environmental…, 438; Ordinary people’s refusal can topple even entrenched systems of power — Shoshana Zuboff, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, 1661; Collective refusal depends on institutional support that shields participants from penalties — Jenny Odell, How to Do Nothing: Resisting the…, 304 (+5 more)

Broader Connections

• Ordinary people’s refusal can topple even entrenched systems of power #corroborates (0.90) — Shoshana Zuboff, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, 1661
• Collective refusal depends on institutional support that shields participants from penalties #qualifies (0.75) — Jenny Odell, How to Do Nothing, 304
• Institutional power responds to community defiance with retaliation and decisive action. #contradicts (0.72) — Luke W. Cole and Sheila R. Foster, From the Ground Up, 440
• Power holders resist social change that threatens their self-interests #qualifies (0.72) — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement, 359