Political Narratology. How Stories Shape Power and Compliance

One of the characteristic signs of a dying narrative is obsessive repetition. Power begins to say the same thing more frequently, louder, more insistently. The effect is the opposite. Repetition ceases to reinforce belief and begins to destroy it.

Words sound like an incantation that no longer works. The formulae remain, but their energy is lost. This is the moment when power does not yet realise the criticality of the moment, but already instinctively tries to maintain its control over interpretation.

Cynicism as a Mass Condition

The next stage is cynicism. Cynicism is not equal to protest, and in the short term it can even be convenient for power.

A cynical person does not believe, but neither do they resist. They adapt, ironise, distance themselves, live a ‘private life’, repeat the phrase ‘they’re all the same’, but it is precisely this cynicism that corrodes the narrative from within.

When a society on a mass scale stops taking words seriously, any mobilisation becomes impossible. Neither fear nor hope nor appeals can work as they once did.

The Narrative Vacuum

The most dangerous state for power is the absence of a story. When power loses its right to the story, a vacuum of meaning emerges. Events are no longer explained, linked together, or justified. Rumours, alternative versions, conspiracy theories, fragmentary explanations, and emotional outbursts appear.

Power may try to fill the vacuum with force, but force does not create meaning. It merely suppresses chaos temporarily.

From Explanation to Coercion

When the narrative ceases to work, power begins to rely on control. Regulation intensifies, the number of prohibitions grows, the language of threats and punishments expands. Explanation gives way to demand.

This is a critical moment: power still exists, but no longer as a story; rather, as pressure. It is precisely here that a qualitative fracture occurs: obedience ceases to be internal and becomes external.

Why Force Cannot Replace the Story

No regime can exist for long on fear alone. Fear is exhausting and requires constant reinforcement. It does not create loyalty – only temporary compliance.

Without a story, power is forced to constantly prove itself anew through repression, displays of force, harsh measures. This is costly, unstable, and dangerous.

A story, on the other hand, is fantastically economical, causing people to obey voluntarily. This is precisely why losing the right to the story is already a strategic defeat.

Competing Stories

As soon as the official narrative weakens, alternatives appear. They may be marginal, radical, naive and dangerous, utopian, or destructive. But they are united by one thing – they fill the void.

At this moment, power no longer controls the space of meanings: it becomes merely one party in a competition of interpretations.

This is a fundamentally new situation, even if everything outwardly appears stable.

The Illusion of Restoration

A mistake often made by power is the attempt to ‘restore the old narrative’. But stories never return in their previous form: the context of the times has changed, people’s experiences have changed, expectations have shifted.

Attempting to speak the old language in a new reality only heightens the feeling of detachment and inadequacy. The right to the story cannot be restored in a purely mechanical, procedural way. It can either be reassembled anew or lost for good.

When Society Stops Listening

The key moment of crisis is not a street protest or a revolution, but indifference. When the words of power no longer evoke anger, support, or even argument; when people simply stop reacting.

At this moment, the story is over. Only its form remains. From here, various scenarios are possible: a sudden collapse, a slow decline, a replacement of the plot, or external intervention. But they all begin with the same thing: the loss of narrative authority.

Why This is Important for Understanding Politics

Understanding how power loses its right to the narrative allows one to see a crisis before it becomes visible. Not through economic indicators, polls, or ratings. But through language, tone, repetitions, and the reaction of society.

Political narratology teaches one to listen not to what is being said, but to how it all ceases to work and loses its capacity to exist. And it is precisely this understanding that allows us to move to the next question – the image of the future as power’s main resource.

Because where the future disappears, so too does consent. It is from here that we shall continue.

Chapter 13. The Image of the Future as the Primary Resource

The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.

Franklin D. Roosevelt

The Future as a Source of Obedience

In politics, victory rarely goes to those who best explain the present. It goes to those who more convincingly describe the future.

Economic indicators may be weak, institutions may be worn out, and elites may be unpopular, but if a power can maintain an image of the future, it retains its primary resource, i.e., society’s patience.