Local violence and politics in KwaZulu-Natal: perceptions of agency in a post-conflict society

Abstract

This article analyses the narratives of survivors of violence in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, and addresses the relationship between local violence, politics and agency in a post-conflict setting. In particular, the study advances an understanding of how local political violence serves to increase or decrease agency. In line with previous research on emotions and agency, our study suggests that fear and anxiety encourage risk avoidance and have a pacifying effect on survivors of violence. It also indicates that anger and enthusiasm are emotions experienced by those who have a strong sense of agency and have become politically mobilised after violence. The study contributes to the debate on local capacity for peacebuilding and democracy by showing how local agency is affected by violence and how survivors of violence can become agents of change through politics.

Keywords:

• local violence
• agency
• South Africa
• post-conflict societies
• peacebuilding

Notes

1. Alexander, “The Local State in Post-War Mozambique”; Lederach, Building Peace; and Menkhaus, “Governance without Government in Somalia.”

2. Donais, Peacebuilding and Local Ownership; MacGinty, “Hybrid Peace”; MacGinty and Richmond, “The Local Turn”; Pugh, “Local Agency”; and Richmond and Mitchell, “Peacebuilding.”

3. Roberts, “Post-conflict Peacebuilding,” 421.

4. Blattman, “From Violence to Voting”; Bellows and Miguel, “War and Local Collective Action.”

5. Steenkamp, “In the Shadow”; and Suhrke and Berdal, The Peace in Between.

6. We use the term ‘agency’ in contrast to ‘political efficacy’, which usually refers only to the belief that one can influence politics and policies.

7. MacGinty, “Hybrid Peace”; Pugh, “Local Agency”; and Richmond and Mitchell, “Peacebuilding.”

8. Brady, “Political Participation”; and Verba, and Nie, Participation in America, 45−54.

9. Barnes and Kaase, Political Action.

10. Balcells, “The Consequences of Victimization”; Bellows and Miguel, “War and Local Collective Action”; and Blattman, “From Violence to Voting.”

11. Blattman, “From Violence to Voting,” 231.

12. Bellows and Miguel. “War and Local Collective Action,” 1145.

13. Balcells, “The Consequences of Victimization.”

14. Wood, Insurgent Collective Action, 235, 246.

15. Lerner and Keltner, “Fear, Anger, and Risk.”

16. Marcus, “Structure of Emotional Response”; MacKuen, “Civic Engagements”; Valentino et al., “Efficacy”; and Valentino et al., “Election Night’s Alright.”

17. Bellows and Miguel. “War and Local Collective Action.”

18. Guelke, South Africa in Transition; du Toit, South Africa’s Brittle Peace.

19. Johnston, “South Africa.”

20. Bonnin, “Legacies of Political Violence”; and Freund, “The Violence in Natal.”

21. Krämer, Violence as Routine, 33.

22. Johnston, “South Africa,” 188; and du Toit, South Africa’s Brittle Peace.

23. Friedman and Atkinson, The Small Miracle.

24. Mottiar, “The Turnover of Power”; Piper, “Democracy for a Bargain”; and Taylor, Justice Denied.

25. Daniel and Southall, Zunami!, 241.

26. Bruce, “Dictating the Local Balance.”

27. Daniel and Southall, Zunami!, 236.

28. Friedman, “Voice for Some,” 47.

29. Pahad, “Political Participation.”

30. Only a few of our interviewees stated that they did not participate in politics at all and did not vote. Only one of the respondents reported that he had never voted (Interview 50).

31. Lerner and Keltner, “Fear, Anger, and Risk”; and Folkman, “Dynamics.”

32. Björkdahl and Gustic, “The Divided City.”

33. Wood, Insurgent Collective Action.

34. Blattman, “From Violence to Voting.”

35. Lerner and Keltner, “Fear, Anger, and Risk”; and Valentino et al.; “Election Night’s Alright.”

Additional information

Funding

We gratefully acknowledge funding from the Swedish Research Council and Riksbankens Jubileumsfond.