Everyday Political Life in Kohima: Power, Democracy, Governance, and Citizen Experience

Authors

  • Dr. Abel Kavahru Assistant Professor (Sociology), Don Bosco College, Kohima, Nagaland - 797001, INDIA. https://orcid.org/0009-0002-0341-8579
  • Ms. Kaovine Venuh Postgraduate Student (Sociology), Don Bosco College, Kohima, Nagaland - 797001, INDIA.
  • Mr. Saneilhoulie Kire Postgraduate Student (Sociology), Don Bosco College, Kohima, Nagaland - 797001, INDIA.
  • Ms. Razila Sangtam Postgraduate Student (Sociology), Don Bosco College, Kohima, Nagaland - 797001, INDIA.
  • Ms. Vini J. Swu Postgraduate Student (Sociology), Don Bosco College, Kohima, Nagaland - 797001, INDIA.
  • Mr. Neivikholie Kezo Postgraduate Student (Sociology), Don Bosco College, Kohima, Nagaland - 797001, INDIA.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55544/ijrah.6.3.4

Keywords:

everyday politics, democracy, power, bureaucracy, political sociology, Nagaland

Abstract

This study examines everyday political life in Kohima, Nagaland, focusing on how power, democracy, participation, and governance are experienced and negotiated in daily contexts. Drawing on qualitative data from approximately sixty respondents, the research explores how political processes extend beyond formal institutions and are embedded in social relationships, cultural norms, and routine interactions.

The findings reveal that while democratic ideals such as participation, equality, and representation are widely recognized, their realization is uneven and shaped by hierarchical power structures, institutional practices, and expectations of social harmony. Political engagement emerges as conditional and pragmatic, influenced by everyday encounters with authority, bureaucracy, and community leadership. By adopting a holistic and interpretive approach, the study demonstrates that political life operates as a relational and interconnected system, where formal and informal dynamics continuously interact. It contributes to political sociology by advancing an understanding of democracy not as a fixed institutional arrangement, but as a lived and negotiated process shaped by overlapping social, cultural, and institutional forces.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Auyero, J., & Benzecry, C. E. (2017). The practical logic of political domination. Sociological Theory, 35(3), 228–252. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735275117725767

Baiocchi, G. (2003). Emergent public spheres: Talking politics in participatory governance. American Sociological Review, 68(1), 52–74. https://doi.org/10.2307/3088903

Bang, H. P., & Eva, S. (1999). The everyday maker: A new challenge to democratic governance. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 21(2), 325–341. https://doi.org/10.1080/10841806.1999.11643381

Benzecry, C. E., & Baiocchi, G. (2017). What is political about political ethnography? Theory and Society, 46(5), 403–440. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-017-9289-z

Boyte, H. C. (2004). Everyday politics: Reconnecting citizens and public life. University of Pennsylvania Press.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Brown, R. H. (1978). Bureaucracy as praxis: Toward a political phenomenology of formal organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23(3), 365–382. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392415

Buchanan, D., & Badham, R. (1999). Politics and organizational change: The lived experience. Human Relations, 52(5), 609–629. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872679905200503

Dekker, P., & Uslaner, E. M. (Eds.). (2003). Social capital and participation in everyday life. Routledge.

Emirbayer, M., & Schneiderhan, E. (2013). Dewey and Bourdieu on democracy. Theory and Society, 42(4), 375–407. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-013-9196-1

Fung, A. (2003). Associations and democracy: Between theories, hopes, and realities. Annual Review of Sociology, 29, 515–539. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.29.010202.100134

Headley, A. M., Wright, J. E., & Meier, K. J. (2021). Bureaucracy, democracy, and race: The limits of symbolic representation. Public Administration Review, 81(6), 1035–1048. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13358

Li, Y., & Marsh, D. (2008). New forms of political participation: Searching for expert citizens and everyday makers. British Journal of Political Science, 38(2), 247–272. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123408000136

McDonnell, E. M. (2025). Bureaucracy in action: The sociology of public administration. Annual Review of Sociology, 51, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-091324-053657

Mettler, S., & Soss, J. (2004). The consequences of public policy for democratic citizenship: Bridging policy studies and mass politics. Perspectives on Politics, 2(1), 55–73. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592704000621

Michels, A., & De Graaf, L. (2010). Examining citizen participation: Local participatory policy making and democracy. Local Government Studies, 36(4), 477–491. https://doi.org/10.1080/03003930.2010.494101

Peeters, R. (2020). The political economy of administrative burdens: A theoretical framework. Administration & Society, 52(4), 566–592. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399719854367

Yates, L. (2022). How everyday life matters: Everyday politics, everyday consumption and social change. Consumption and Society, 1(1), 144–160. https://doi.org/10.1332/275284922X16425132167646

Downloads

Published

2026-05-01

How to Cite

Kavahru, A., Venuh, K., Kire, S., Sangtam, R., Swu, V. J., & Kezo, N. (2026). Everyday Political Life in Kohima: Power, Democracy, Governance, and Citizen Experience. Integrated Journal for Research in Arts and Humanities, 6(3), 21–26. https://doi.org/10.55544/ijrah.6.3.4

Issue

Vol. 6 No. 3 (2026): May Issue

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Dr. Abel Kavahru, Ms. Kaovine Venuh, Mr. Saneilhoulie Kire, Ms. Razila Sangtam, Ms. Vini J. Swu, Mr. Neivikholie Kezo

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.