Send message to Author

Paper short abstract:

Based on ethnographic research in Cameroon, this presentation examines how and why people do not mobilise in the context of political crisis, despite radical beliefs.

Paper long abstract:

The Anglophone Crisis is a de-facto armed conflict between the Cameroonian state and a separatist movement demanding independence for the country’s Anglophone minority regions. In my dissertation project, I examine the trajectories of civil and militant activists in the Anglophone Crisis and discuss the factors shaping their mobilisation. A key aspect of that project is critically engaging with the common assumption that mobilisation is predicated on ideological conviction or radicalisation. On the contrary, I find social position, circumstance, and perceived agency to be more impactful on the If and How of political mobilisation in the Anglophone Crisis than any specific level of separatist conviction.

In this presentation, I want to draw attention to the flip side of that observation: Ideological conviction can and does exist irrespective of mobilisation. During three phases of ethnographic research between 2018 and 2023, I interviewed many Anglophones who, despite holding radical political beliefs, including separatist sentiments, did not mobilise or have withdrawn from political action. To make sense of their engaged in-action, I want to, firstly, share explanations of “non-practicing” separatists for their chosen strategy of laying low and, secondly, highlight examples of private engagement with the Anglophone separatist movement that easily go overlooked. I argue that, due to digital and social connections, peripheral perspectives on the Anglophone Crisis are, in many cases, just as informed and just as radical as those found among front-line humanitarian workers, protest leaders, and (ex) fighters.