The leaderlessness conundrum: Politics and anti-politics in global justice movements.

Collective action failures are often attributed to inadequate organisation and leadership. Protest movements – including recent state-level protests and revolts, from the "Arab Spring" to the square occupations and Black Lives Matter, and transnational ones like the World Social Forum and recent expressions of the environmental movement such as Fridays for Future and Extinction Rebellion– have been arenas of conflicts over organisational structures and leadership. Activists consider leaders along a spectrum from representatives of the group interests, values and identity, through seductive manipulators of individuals and discourses, to illegitimate undemocratic usurpers. Some activist collectives reject leadership's emancipatory claims and (cl)aim to prefigure horizontal political relationships. For others, leaderlessness (re)produces structures of domination that cause the collapse of collective action. I propose that a) groups appoint leaders (formal or informal) when they feel unable to ensure their survival (due to oppression, challenges to lifestyle or livelihood) or to prevent the spread of unbearable feelings (helplessness, frustration, anxiety), b) leaders do not (mostly, often at all) represent the group's conscious will, but its underlying emotions and beliefs, and c) leadership and individual autonomy are inversely proportional and so are leadership investments and group-wide political creativity. Drawing on critical leadership studies and the psychoanalytic study of groups, I introduce some aspects of the relationship between leadership and anti-leadership and, on the other hand, politics and anti-politics. The argument presented applies to any group, formal, informal and unconscious. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]