Skip navigation

In “Does Democracy Mean Something?”, Ranciere describes the seeming contradiction of democracy between the chaos inherent to democracy and the power structures implemented that, in order to maintain that chaos, oppose it. But, since we’re considering human behavior, there really is no contradiction: instead of a paradox or negation, such acts of power are democratic, because they organize power in such a way that opposes the power dynamic that naturally arises barring other source of power: that of violence or mandate (police). How democracy fights against the police is by finding order in less violent of ways, namely the uniformity of belief. It’s here that a less violent version of order and power is exercised. Furthermore, the mode with which a certain belief is transferred becomes vital to and essentially indistinguishable from the meaning of a belief, as the act of unifying the message is a form of combative order itself. This form of consolidation of belief explains such fantasies as the utopic cell phone in “People Power II” or the repetitious structure and form of index card videos and other such activism sites. If subjects in a democracy wish to have a political influence, then they must behave unilaterally, while still resisting the violence which undermines the preservation of the variety of beliefs in a democracy, and, if a thought is to catch on, then, like an Internet message, it must adhere to a common protocol that informs a belief’s meaning.