The political psychology of representing others

Spectacular events such as Brexit and the US Capitol riots have been widely recognised as signalling a crisis in Western representative democracies. From questions of political leaders’ mental health to the seemingly distorted perception of reality amongst increasingly cloistered sections of populations, this political crisis has displayed an important psychological dimension. While operating within the field of political theory, the paper critically interrogates the specificity of the psychological aspects associated with practices of democratic representation. In the face of resurgent critiques of representative government, an important strand in democratic theory has recently reaffirmed the irreplaceable value of representation to contemporary democracy. Rather than a somewhat defective substitute for the ideal of direct democracy, scholars of the so-called “representative turn” rediscovered representative democracy as itself an ideal model – one, specifically, that fosters in citizens a “representational” mode of judging reality which accounts for a plurality of viewpoints. Crucially, democratic representation here is not understood as pertaining exclusively to the sphere of formal/electoral politics, but as a feature permeating the fabric of democratic societies at myriad levels, including instances as diverse as non-elected political actors, representatives of the scientific community, and trade union representatives. Building on this, my work intervenes to explore whether and how the psychological impact of such practices of representation succeeds in fostering a representational use of judgment. Whilst scholars across relevant academic fields have focused almost exclusively on representation from the perspective of represented citizens, my research adopts the neglected epistemological perspective of representative themselves: citizens engaged in the experience of representing of others. Looking from what I term the “representative standpoint”, I bring to light underexplored features of the mechanics and dynamics governing both institutional and non-institutional instances of representation, drawing links between their purely formal aspects and the psychological experiences that they involve. In particular, I analyse the political psychology of representing others looking at the four fundamental relationships that that I take it to entail: 1. the relationship between the representative and the group (party, social movement, etc.) to which they belonged prior to their identification as representative; 2. the relationship between the representative and the general public; 3. the relationship between a representative and the representatives of other groups; 4. the relationship of the representative with themselves. In conclusion, I gesture towards the potential impact of my analysis in matters of institutional design and practices of social innovation.