IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/ccasxx/v35y2016i3p421-438.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Blogging Zhanaozen: hegemonic discourse and authoritarian resilience in Kazakhstan

Author

Listed:
  • David Lewis

Abstract

Post-Soviet authoritarian regimes – particularly in Central Asia – have proved highly resilient since independence. Existing explanations for regime longevity should be augmented by consideration of non-material, discursive sources of political legitimacy. A robust authoritarian regime requires the production and circulation of a hegemonic discourse that is internalized by influential social groups. This type of dominant discourse has emerged in Kazakhstan, making it difficult for political opponents to promote alternative political imaginaries and mobilize popular support. State control over media is challenged by Internet-based platforms, but in Kazakhstan social media and blogging have also offered an opportunity for the regime to reproduce its own hegemonic discourse. This article uses a discourse analysis of posts by bloggers in the aftermath of a violent conflict in Zhanaozen in Kazakhstan in 2011 to demonstrate how central elements in the state discourse are reproduced online, even by independent bloggers, suggesting that an official discourse has the ability to maintain its hegemonic status despite widespread use of blogs and social media.

Suggested Citation

  • David Lewis, 2016. "Blogging Zhanaozen: hegemonic discourse and authoritarian resilience in Kazakhstan," Central Asian Survey, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(3), pages 421-438, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:ccasxx:v:35:y:2016:i:3:p:421-438
    DOI: 10.1080/02634937.2016.1161902
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/02634937.2016.1161902
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/02634937.2016.1161902?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:ccasxx:v:35:y:2016:i:3:p:421-438. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/ccas .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.