COMMUNICATION, POWER, AND CRITIQUE: TOWARD A CRITICAL THEORY OF EVERYDAY RESISTANCE

• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1059-4337(04)35006-4
• Pages: 191-218
• Published date: 21 June 2005
• Date: 21 June 2005
• Author: Glenn Mackin

COMMUNICATION, POWER, AND

CRITIQUE: TOWARD A CRITICAL

THEORY OF EVERYDAY RESISTANCE

Glenn Mackin

ABSTRACT

Thisessayoutlinesacriticaltheoryofeverydayresistance.This theory adopts

a de-centered conception of law and power, and draws upon the theory of

deliberative democracy to specify the conditions under which such power

becomes illegitimate. This allows us to see everyday resistanceas a symptom

that discursive power has been generated under unjust conditions. Such an

approach opens a newpath of research in which we study everyday resistance

as a response to the participatory deficits that exist in contemporary systems

of power,and then identify the possibilities and obstacles for remedying those

deficits.

1. INTRODUCTION: THE POLITICS

OF MAKING COFFEE

For the last seven years, Amelia has been an office worker and administrative

assistant. White and college-educated, she now works for the port commission

in a large urban area. The port is a quasi-governmental agency. It works much

like any corporation, except that the public elects the port commissioners, who

act much like a board of directors. Though Amelia worked as an assistant to these

Studies in Law, Politics, and Society

Studies in Law, Politics, and Society,Volume 35, 191–218

Copyright © 2005 by Elsevier Ltd.

All rights of reproduction in any form reserved

ISSN: 1059-4337/doi:10.1016/S1059-4337(04)35006-4

191

192 GLENN MACKIN

elected officials they were not, in terms of the port’sformal organization, her actual

supervisors. Her immediate supervisor was in charge of the commission office,and

answered to the CEO. Thus, if she had problems with the commissioners, Amelia

would first discuss the matter with her supervisor, and could in principle consult

with the human resources department. If the problem was bad enough, human

resources could intervene to recommend or require sensitivity training, official

reprimands, and so forth.

As a governmental organization, the port treats its workers relativelywell. They

get good benefits, and as a senior administrative assistant, Amelia made an income

that placed her solidly in the middle class. Nevertheless, as anyone working in

an office will attest, regardless of income and educational status, administrative

assistants are near the low end of the office hierarchy. It is not just that they must

spend their time assisting others with a myriad of tasks (scheduling trips, keeping

thebudget,settingmeetings,makingcopies,andsoon),butalso they are reminded,

in word and deed, precisely who has status and power in the office. And so they

are subject to countless and often daily assaults on their sense of pride and dignity.

Amelia, in particular, seemed acutely aware of this phenomenon. One of the

commissioners particularly angered her with such behavior. He would frequently

ask her to get him coffee – something that, as she emphatically claimed, was “not in

my job description!” To make matters worse,he would usually do so only in front

of others – visitors, other staff, and so on. In one particularly egregious incident,

he asked Amelia, before a public meeting and in front of several other members of

the staff, to make dinner reservations for himself and his wife. Amelia explicitly

understood this pattern of inappropriate behavior and remarks as a reflection of

gender dynamics, saying that “the commissioner seems to think that women can

be expected to do these sorts of things.” He had even brought his young daughter

to work and seemed to expect the women in the office to watch after her. Amelia

determined that she must do something, if not to change the dynamics of the

relationship, then at least to salvage some dignity. She went to her immediate

supervisor, who she explained, is quite awareof how inappropriate commissioners

can behave. However, his response to office problems is often “to ignore them and

hope they go away,” and so while he understood the problem, he ultimately did

nothing. The other option was to consult human resources, but she didn’t want to

appear to be “making a big deal” out of something that is, on the face of it, rather

trivial. Amelia was also not inclined to confront the commissioner directly, since

she “really hates” direct confrontation. She resented the fact that she needed to

explain to someone that he needed to treat her with some modicum of dignity and

respect.

After a pattern aggravating behavior,the commissioner once again made a point

of asking Amelia to get him coffee in a public meeting. Seething with resentment,