Consent and Dissent Formation: State, Religion and Capital in the Making/Unmaking of Vizhinjam International Seaport, Kerala
Author: Abdul Raoof, abdulraoof@isec.ac.in
Department: Sociology
University: Institute for Social and Economic Change, India
Supervisor: Dr Sobin George
Year of completion: 2023
Language of dissertation: English
Keywords:
consent
, dissent
, discourse analysis
, Vizhinjam Port
Areas of Research:
Political Sociology
, Communication, Knowledge and Culture
, Sociology of Development
Abstract
The construction of public opinion in democratic societies has been widely analysed across disciplines, focusing on the dynamics of consent and dissent shaped by ideology, media, and propaganda. Public opinion formation is traditionally studied through media influence, communication studies, and electoral politics. Consent often highlights media's role in shaping perspectives, while dissent is associated with freedom of expression, protests, and democratic struggles. However, conventional frameworks fail to address the nuanced interplay between stakeholders in the discourse, such as the consolidation or dispersion of opinions. Emerging social constructionist, interactionist, and post-structuralist theories attempt to overcome these limitations by emphasizing processes over agents but also face constraints in fully exploring consent/dissent formation.
This study investigates the Vizhinjam seaport project in Kerala, analyzing 30 years of discourse surrounding its development. Proposed by the Government of Kerala in a coastal fishing village in Thiruvananthapuram, the project sparked intense public debates. Initially withdrawn in 1994 due to protests, the project was reintroduced in 2002 but faced mixed reactions. While some expected economic growth, dissent arose, particularly from the affected local community under the Latin Catholic Church (LCC) leadership. Political leaders largely failed to represent dissenting voices, intensifying grassroots opposition.
Focusing on the roles of state, religion, and capital in shaping public opinion, the study examines how agents influence supportive and opposing stances on the project. The research employs Political Discourse Theory (PDT) and the Sociology of Knowledge Approach to Discourse (SKAD) to analyze how discourse and counter-discourse are generated, emphasizing the silenced voices and the socio-political contexts that shape meaning. These frameworks move beyond surface-level interpretations, revealing how discourse is constructed and evolves through power struggles.
The findings highlight the multiplicity of voices within movements, challenging the notion of monolithic perspectives from the oppressed or oppressors. Dominance in public debates stems from the strategic framing of interpretative schemes. For instance, the seaport gained initial consent by framing implementation delays as risks rather than failures, while dissent emerged from contrasting real-life experiences with developmental narratives.
The study identifies strategies employed by stakeholders, particularly the state, to suppress contradictory views. The Kerala government used political redefinition and meaning assignment to neutralize dissent, although these strategies' effectiveness varies across contexts. It argues that the socio-political positioning of stakeholders influences their ability to dominate discourse rather than their intrinsic empowerment as agents. Furthermore, the study contends that discursive voices are fluid, capable of transitioning between dominance and marginalization as socio-political and economic conditions change.
This research underscores that consent and dissent in public discourse are neither absolute nor static but are continually reshaped through struggles for dominance. It calls for a nuanced understanding of discourse formation, recognizing the shifting relevance of sidelined voices and their potential to re-emerge and challenge dominant narratives.
