Pussy Riot as the Boomerang Gang


Risse and Sikkink, in the first chapter of their collection of essays on human rights, put forth a theory that is repeated in our video lecture, the Boomerang Model. The Boomerang Model is based on a fairly straightforward concept; a civilian group within a nation-state takes exception to a policy/policies enacted by that government and attempts to sway their government away from that policy. When that doesn’t work the civilian group instead lobbies third-parties such as Western powers, human rights NGOs, and international groups with an interest in human rights.  
                Pussy Riot is a particularly notorious example of a civilian interest group that could be classified in the boomerang model. Fed up with Russian oppression of, well, everything, Pussy Riot formed as a feminist protest punk rock group in the summer of 2011 to draw attention to their chosen issues in a particularly memorable way. The women involved are generally in their twenties to mid-thirties and have repeatedly proven themselves indifferent to jail time in the name of their cause. In fact, the jail time can work to their benefit as an additional way to draw attention on the world stage.
                Their latest globally-recognized protest occurred quite recently, during the 2018 FIFA World Cup held conveniently, for their purposes, in Russia. Four representatives of Pussy Riot made their way onto the field during the final France-Croatia match. The group took credit for the act in an online video. Their stated purpose was to draw attention to the lack of competition in the Russian political system. While Pussy Riot also stages smaller scale protests that receive more coverage in Russia than abroad, they do fit neatly into the boomerang model. I, an American, sit here to write this, very aware of their messaging, which can be loosely extrapolated to assume that I am not the only person outside of Russia who has noticed their campaign. In fact, Samantha Power, the former US ambassador to the United Nations, met with Pussy Riot in 2014, a sign that Western powers have taken notice of the women’s demonstrations.
                Whether or not their actions have produced any measurable effect within Russia is debatable, but they receive sufficient media attention to keep their group, music, and message in the public eye, which is the first step towards making change.  

Sourcing

Thomas Risse and Kathryn Sikkink, “The Socialization of International Human Rights Norms into Domestic Practices: Introduction,” in The Power of Human Rights International Norms and Domestic Change, ed. Risse, Sikkink, and Ropp (Cambridge, 1999).

Comments

  1. UnknownJuly 23, 2018 at 8:16 PM

    Nicely put Emma! I agree, the Pussy Riot is a good example of the Boomerang Model and of media activism. They challenge cultural codes and messages using media forums to target a bigger audience. They've been able to garner more attention abroad, specifically in the West than domestically? What do you make of this?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. EHJuly 25, 2018 at 9:14 PM

      I think their biggest audience is still in Russia, but the fact that they do garner international attention, especially public acknowledgement from official representatives of western governments, is a sign that their protests do have a measurable impact.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Waltz's Neorealism

The reading by Waltz points out some key points that Neorealists believe in. Neorealists view power as a possibly useful means. Neorealism contends that international politics can be understood only if the effects of structure are added to the unit-level explanations of traditional realism. It rejects the assumption that man’s innate lust for power constitutes a sufficient cause of war in the absence of of any other. Specifically, we need to look at the causal link interacting units and international outcomes. We’ve established before with Hobbes that the system we live in is anarchy. States are rational actors that at their basest level want to survive. Neorealism states that within an anarchy, states need to provide their own security to protect themselves from threats. This security dilemma is a problem, war occurs. This depends on situations and characteristics of states, not because states want to have war. The more important question then becomes what started th...
Read more

Corporations Will Run Amuck

Corporations help create domestic and global economic prosperity. However, when they grow extremely rich they can become powerful which may threaten sovereign actors’ authority, both on a national and international level. Additionally, through hefty donations their lobbying capability allows them to manipulate politicians and the political process undermining democratic processes and devaluing the voice of the people.  In order to prevent corporations from interfering with the democratic processes there needs to be an overarching system that monitors what corporations do and how they do it. To a certain extent room and flexibility may help corporations better compete against one another. Capitalist societies like the United States believe that less regulations on corporations means more incentive to be innovative. And while that may be true to some extent, there are also many abuses these companies commit in order to maximize their profits. Without strict gui...
Read more

Balance of Power Theory is Not All Encompassing

There are several theories that attempt to explain the rise and fall of great powers. In reviewing the theories it appears that no single theory can account for every situation that has occurred in international politics at least the way in which these theories are currently elucidated. This is especially true concerning the balance of power hypothesis, which claims that international stability is created when there is an equilibrium among state actors, especially concerning militarily capability. However, findings show that hegemonic stability may ensue in a multi-state system. While the balance of power theory may account for some of the outcomes in world politics, to some extent, the theory loses credibility through its inability to account for variations between states and the rise and fall of great powers. The balance of power theory certainly does not hold true in the case of the United States. In my view, the US is the current hegemon and thus, we are living in a unipolar w...
Read more