| Abstrakt: |
Recently, Auyero and Swistun (2008) demonstrated how the "work of confusion" of powerful agents is crucial for understanding the acquiescence of the powerless. In this paper I pick up their thread, explaining how social movement organizations (SMOs) contest this work of confusion, how the state and banks create confusion when a SMO is contesting their claims, and how SMOs use confusion to motivate and maintain their membership. The argument is based on ethnographic evidence of ten months of observation and 79 interviews with Chilean social housing mortgage debtors, many of whom have collectively defaulted since 2007. I find that the bank's false threats of foreclosures are believed largely because the SMOs do not systematically inform non-members and because one of the organizations reproduces the myth of foreclosures to maintain its membership. This leads uninformed and scared debtors to renegotiate debts in extremely unfavorable conditions. Yet since non-members trust their neighbors more than the bank, they do not respond to false threats when they are informed. Additionally, the SMOs' demonstration to debtors about how they had been tricked into unfair conditions and responsibility induces feelings of injustice and motivation for resistance. Finally, I describe how SMOs confuse members to motivate participation, especially with with false expectations of benefits for members only that aim to avoid free-riding. Together this shows how confusion can be an important tool to motivate both collective resistance and acquiescence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
