Conference Agenda

Authoritarianism constitutes a staple of social and political psychology research since Adorno et al.’s Authoritarian Personality (1950). Adorno and his colleagues drew heavily on theoretical and methodological insights from psychoanalysis, Marxian thinking and the American empiricist psychology of their times. In so doing, they formulated an extensive, research-based account of authoritarianism as a construct that links specific socioeconomic and political conditions with the cultural production, through, mainly, pedagogical practices, of a type of personality that is particularly vulnerable to fascist propaganda. The notion of culture and the concern over the de(legitimation) of political authoritarianism are pivotal for our research also. However, our epistemological position diverges from the one favoured by Adorno et al. Drawing on critical discursive social psychology, we maintain that the naturalisation and reproduction of authoritarian political practices occur thoughtfully within rhetorical / ideological practices unfolding, amongst other domains, in political discourse and lay talk, often through invocations and rhetorical uses of occasioned constructions of culture. Our analytic corpora consist of (a) transcripts of Greek parliamentary debates pertaining to the so-called ‘wiretapping affair’ a surveillance scandal, which recently rocked Greece’s pollical life raising concerns as to the (alleged) governmental authoritarian turn in the country; and, of (b) twelve focus groups, collected within a wider research project on authoritarianism, with some of the groups enlisting participants employed in Greek military and police forces. Our analyses indicate that, in both political and lay discourse, a common discursive resource, mobilised, for the (de-)legitimation of authoritarian political practices pertains to evaluatively tinged conceptualisations of culture and hierarchically ordered cultural difference. As we argue, culture and cultural hierarchy, emerge as rhetorical / ideological resources and accomplishments for meaning making, accountability management and (de-)legitimation of authoritarian political practices.

This paper examines the perspectives of young people from challenging contexts in 10 European countries (Austria, Croatia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, the Netherlands, Slovenia, and Spain) on the state of democracy and its development in the near future. Across European Union there are trends of growing alienation of youth from democratic institutions and declining political participation. Aforementioned makes understanding the views of young people on democracy in 21st-century Europe important. Data were collected through the Horizon Europe project "Critical ChangeLab - Democracy meets arts: Critical change labs for building democratic cultures through creative and narrative practices." A standardized research approach enabled comparative analysis across 10 different contexts. In each country, in-depth case studies were conducted, including focus groups with young, semi-structured interviews with individuals working with these youth, and a mini ethnography. The selected cases reflect the diversity of young people’s identities and life circumstances, capturing significant variation across geographic locations, from rural areas and small towns to national capitals and major European cities like Paris, Berlin, and Barcelona. The study also addressed the experiences of youth facing various hardships, such as female teenage STEM students, youth at the EU’s borders, migrants, those in substitute care, and LGBTQ youth. Focus group participants, aged 11 to 19, were selected in cooperation with organizations familiar with the youth and their challenges. Additionally, project partners identified individuals from local government, educational institutions, NGOs, and youth associations for interviews, providing further insights into young people's democratic opportunities. A total of 80 young people and 49 individuals working with youth participated in the research. The results offer valuable insights into the diverse perspectives of youth in challenging contexts and how variations in context, social structures, civic education, and the digital society shape their experiences and views on democracy today and in the near future.

Across generations, South Louisiana has existed at the intersection of environmental, economic, and social upheaval—where climate migration, recurring storms, and the deep scars of environmental racism and generational poverty converge. From hurricanes that reshape coastlines to industrial contamination that poisons land and water, the region’s history tells a story of communities repeatedly displaced, rebuilding on shifting ground, and enduring cycles of loss and renewal. Violence, both physical and structural, threads through this narrative: the violence of extraction, neglect, and systemic inequity that positions resilience not as choice but as necessity. Over time, endurance has become a hallmark of regional identity—celebrated in folklore, media, and policy alike—yet increasingly weaponized to rationalize insufficient aid, stalled recovery, and the continued exploitation of people and place.

This paper critiques how resilience is weaponized and co-opted by institutions to sustain inequitable systems. Rather than fostering genuine well-being or reform, organizational narratives valorize individuals’ capacity to endure adversity, framing perseverance as virtue while deflecting responsibility for structural change. This dynamic disproportionately affects marginalized groups, who are praised for “pushing through” exhaustion or injustice instead of being supported through meaningful transformation.

Using a community phenomenological approach, this work examines the lived experience and collective memory of South Louisiana over the past two decades of storms, poverty, and terrorism-related trauma. It interrogates how resilience has been defined by outsiders—government agencies, media, and institutions—and the ways these definitions have been weaponized to justify neglect, austerity, and cultural stereotyping. By situating personal narrative within broader sociopolitical and environmental contexts, the paper explores the enduring impacts of this weaponization on community identity, well-being, and recovery, calling for a reorientation toward collective care, structural accountability, and authentic forms of resilience grounded in place and lived experience.

This conceptual paper examines the potential long-term psychosocial and somatic ramifications of recently passed conservative education laws in US states like Florida and Texas. These laws, which severely restrict discussions of gender, sexuality, and human biology in public schools, codify ideological assumptions that (a) minors must be protected from "inappropriate" topics, and (b) sex before heterosexual marriage is wrong and dangerous.

Drawing on narrative inquiry data from eight women raised within conservative Christian communities that enacted these same ideologies, we employ Jackson and Mazzei’s (2022) "plugging in" methodology. We analyse the women’s lived experiences of bodily illiteracy, sexual shame, and chronic genital pain (dyspareunia) as a prospective lens to understand the potential consequences of these laws especially on children with vulvas and vaginas. The findings illustrate how enforced silences and disparaging discourses led to a profound alienation from their own bodies, a phenomenon conceptualised by Labuski (2015) as the accumulation of “genital baggage.”

We argue that these legislative acts function as state-sanctioned mediating institutions that perpetuate this accumulation, fostering sexual illiteracy and creating conditions where genital pain and dysfunction become normalized. The analysis demonstrates how ideological messages can become somatically embodied, with tangible health consequences. Ultimately, this study contends that such restrictive legislation does not merely limit curriculum but actively contributes to a cultural and corporeal subordination of bodily autonomy. We will conclude by considering possibilities for resistance and the urgent need for educational approaches that foster sexual literacy, genital intelligence, and pleasure-affirming futures, despite the challenging political constraints.

This paper traces the journey of a UK-based early-career academic who has been reshaped by witnessing the ongoing destruction of Gaza and by engaging in dialogue with its scholars and educators. It argues that Gaza can serve as a moral and intellectual compass for all committed to social justice—reminding us that no pursuit of justice can stand apart from the struggles of the oppressed and centering their voices. Through two collaborative projects, the paper illustrates how global events can reconfigure scholarly identity, purpose, and practice.

The first collaboration interrogates the concept of scholasticism. While widely circulated in English-language research, the term is often confined to Western theoretical vocabularies. In Palestine, however, scholasticism is a lived condition, bound to the realities of siege, occupation, and survival. Working in dialogue with Palestinian colleagues, I moved from reading about scholasticism to listening to it—hearing what the term means within their everyday lives. Their narratives unsettled dominant academic framings, revealing forms of knowledge rooted in endurance, affect, and collective resilience, an epistemology unknown to Western Academia.

The second collaboration emerged during the current genocide in Gaza, where education persists under bombardment and displacement. Extending earlier research on educational continuity, I initiated a collective book project in which Gazan educators and families document learning amid devastation—through mobile classrooms, improvised teaching in camps, and symbolic acts of carrying books while fleeing. Their stories reveal that education is not merely instruction but survival itself.

In this presentation, I will share their stories, poems, and vignettes—their experiences, their attempts at being erased, and their insistence on life through learning. These narratives offer a compass for scholars everywhere: to shape and reshape ourselves as witnesses to the eradication of all that lies between land and sky, where education endures as the only living pulse of hope.