Street Art and Democracy in Latin America

Olivier Dabène

• Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan
• Year: 2019
• Print ISBN:
  9783030269128
• eBook ISBN:
  9783030269135
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: American Government
• Index: Politics & International Relations

This book explores street art's contributions to democracy in Latin America through a comparative study of five cities: Bogota (Colombia), São Paulo (Brazil), Valparaiso (Chile), Oaxaca (Mexico) and Havana (Cuba). The author argues that when artists invade public space for the sake of disseminating rage, claims or statements, they behave as urban citizens who try to raise public awareness, nurture public debates and hold authorities accountable. Street art also reveals how public space is governed. When local authorities try to contain, regulate or repress public space invasions, they can achieve their goals democratically if they dialogue with the artists and try to reach a consensus inspired by a conception of the city as a commons. Under specific conditions, the book argues, street level democracy and collaborative governance can overlap, prompting a democratization of democracy.

© The Author(s) 2020

O. DabèneStreet Art and Democracy in Latin AmericaStudies of the Americashttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26913-5_1

Begin Abstract

1. Introduction

Olivier Dabène^{1, 2}

(1)

Political Science, Paris Institute of Political Studies (Sciences Po), Paris, France

(2)

Political Observatory of Latin America and the Caribbean (OPALC), Center for International Studies (CERI), Paris Institute of Political Studies (Sciences Po), Paris, France

Olivier Dabène

Email: [email protected]

End Abstract

Notwithstanding some nuances, the academic community generally agrees upon an awfully pessimistic diagnosis in the early twenty-first century: democracy is declining everywhere (Diamond et al. 2016; Foa and Mounk 2016, 2017; Puddington and Roylance 2017). The number of democracies reached a peak around 2006. It then steadily declined. This severe judgment is easily backed by a plethora of empirical evidence showing that populism has spread worldwide, and that representative democracy seems neither able nor willing to deal with the political impact of economic inequalities yielded by the “new gilded age” (Bartels 2016). Citizens are growing increasingly frustrated about unequal representation and biased government responsiveness. They are deceived by anti-establishment candidates who end up undermining democracy once in office. Authoritarian behaviors subvert the very existence of democracy even in a country such as the United States (Levitsky and Ziblatt 2018). Other indications of waning quality of democracy include unfree and unfair elections (Schedler 2006), failure to preserve the rule of law (Zacaria 2003), and Linz’s classical argument about excessive presidentialism that has been extensively discussed by the literature (Linz and Valenzuela 1994).

Often underneath the surface, manifestations of democratic vitality go unnoticed because nation-states and governments are generally the sole units of analysis and the electoral processes are the only metric used to gauge democracy. Downscaling to local politics and shifting from a minimalist to a deliberative account of democracy contribute to unveiling a quite distinct reality. In localities, communities, neighborhoods or streets, grassroots organizations (Abers 2000; Stout 2010), urban citizens (Cunningham 2011; Holston 2008; Lee 2013) or, quite simply, neighbors (Rosenblum 2016) can develop democratic practices that deserve attention. They include a discursive dimension that is closely scrutinized by deliberative democratic theorists (Dryzek 2000; Goodin 2008). Additionally, many cities are adopting participatory mechanisms, especially in Latin America (Fung 2011; Cameron et al. 2012; Montambeault 2015), and local authorities are keen to foster urban collaborative governance (Foster and Iaione 2016).

Subnational politics is often studied to depict authoritarian enclaves (Gibson 2005) and less attention has been paid to democracy, with the exception of Gilley (2010). This book offers a contribution to this body of literature. It focuses on urban politics, examining if, when and how informal democracy interacts with formal collaborative governance . I also investigate how this interaction evolves over time and the type of outcomes it yields. To inform these broad research questions, the book explores cases of urban public space invasion by street artists in Latin America. Interventions on city walls, I contend, tell stories about democracy, and Latin America is a fertile ground to study such stories, because the region is the home of “political experimentalism” and “continual institutional innovation” with deliberative democracy (Pogrebinschi 2018, p. 830).

The core argument of this book is twofold. First, when artists invade public space for the sake of voicing rage and disseminating claims or statements, they raise public awareness, nurture public debate and hold authorities accountable. They can also interact with neighbors and thereby contribute to community building. Consequently, so goes my argument, they behave as urban citizens and foster street-level deliberative democracy , even if they violate the law on a regular basis. Second, street art reveals how public space is governed. When local authorities try to contain, regulate and monitor or even repress public space invasions, they can achieve their goals democratically if, instead of simply criminalizing the activity, they hold a dialogue with the artists and try to reach an understanding inspired by a conception of the city as a commons.

The research and fieldwork that I have carried out for this book reveal that street-level democracy and urban citizenship were most likely to prosper when the artists were politically involved (militants, activists) and when they were associated with social movements. Their type of work and the way they convey their message(s) matter as well. A collective of artists painting a large mural will likely hold dialogues with the neighbors over the final outcome, hence strengthening grassroots democracy (Stout 2010). It is also the case when an isolated artist disseminates small stencils, providing he or she exposes signifiers that can nourish public debate . But it is not the case when teenagers aggressively tag private properties or historical monuments. In that case, it can even be argued that they undermine democracy with acts of despotism (Rosenblum 2016).

This research has also uncovered that public space governance has become democratic when recently elected officials have established participatory practices. In another scenario, the authorities had to address pressing issues and/or were challenged by civil society organizations or artists. They met their demands in a collaborative way. Yet, participatory decision-making is not always easy to implement. The agency pattern is a key factor. Different bureaucratic agencies with capacities to enact rules and enforce them can compete with each other. Depending on the outcome, the democratic governance of public space can turn out to be hindered or exhilarated.

The diverse cases examined in this book are more or less distant from the democratic ideal type that rests upon two overlapping and cross-fertilizing components: urban citizen artists strengthening street-level democracy and authorities keen to deliberate over the use of public space and promote urban collaborative governance . This configuration provides a fav...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Front Matter
• 1. Introduction
• 2. Analytical Framework
• 3. Bogotá: Public Space Between Appropriation and Deliberation
• 4. São Paulo: Pixadores’ Public Scream of Hate
• 5. Valparaíso: A Tale of Murals, Tags and World Heritage
• 6. Oaxaca: Revolutionary Art and the (Difficult) Quest for Democracy
• 7. Havana: Going Public, No Matter What
• 8. Conclusion: Street Art and Democracy—Lessons Learned
• Back Matter