Spectacle as an exercise of power in politics

Written by Crystal King

Any views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the views or positions of any entities they are associated with or represent.

In this brief think piece, I will discuss the multifaceted exercise of power; specifically, how politics becomes performative, and how performative politics has become one of the more visible ways that power is exercised and contested today. In my opinion, the post-Obama era marked a political climatic shift. We’ve moved away from what many political theorists would call the more conventional deliberative, civility-forward style of politics (one that often overlapped with technocratic and institutionalist governance) toward what political scientists increasingly describe as a populist-personalist style (Moffitt, 2016; Ostiguy 2009). This leader-centred politics treats attention as the prize and performance as the method (Moffitt, 2016). Moffitt’s work on populism as a political style is useful here: he argues it commonly performs politics through “the people vs the elite,” bad manners and a constant narrative of crisis. And as far as I have witnessed, this style is inherently toxic.

Not because citizens should never be passionate, or because politics should be sterile. It becomes toxic because when performance becomes the main strategy, norm-breaking becomes currency and decency gets rebranded as fraud. Antics are praised as “real,” “raw” and “honest,” while competence is dismissed as “scripted.” Aiolfi describes this as the “transgressive” turn in populist style where violating expectations is the point, because it signals authenticity and power (Aiolfi, 2022). Thus, I must ask: are antics in and decency out?

Before I go any further, I want to clarify that when I discuss Trump’s style of politics, I’m not only talking about one man. I mean a broader set of political actions: boisterous, unconventional behaviour that openly disregards political decency, and a willingness to treat public life like entertainment, because entertainment moves crowds faster than policy ever will. Unfortunately, the evidence suggests that emotion-heavy, moralized messaging spreads more efficiently online (Brady et al. 2017). In their work, they show that for example, “moral-emotional” language measurably increases diffusion in social networks, meaning that outrage and spectacle don’t just feel louder, they are structurally rewarded by how attention travels. So, when I say entertainment moves crowds faster than policy, I am talking about an attention economy where the political incentive is clear: if you want reach, you perform. Unfortunately, this style has evidently diffused into The Bahamas, and as a Bahamian, I am not happy about it.

To be clear: The Bahamas (and politicians across the wider Caribbean) have never been shy about utilising spectacle, whether to convey points in Parliament or show contempt during campaigns. The behaviour itself is not the jarring concern. The more consequential concern is how arbitrarily acceptable it has become to too many of us, too easily, too often. And my thoughts on the public reaction stems from something basic: once you strip away the fluff, a leader is still a leader. A leader is not simply a competitor collecting points; a leader is an example, especially in a country as small and interconnected as The Bahamas is.

In early December 2024, Shanendon Cartwright, then a senior figure in the opposition, the Free National Movement (FNM) party, grabbed the parliamentary mace and threw it out of the House of Assembly’s window during a heated clash that followed major public controversy tied to police corruption allegations. Reuters described the scene as erupting during debate on the scandal, with Cartwright acting after not being allowed to speak. Cartwright defended the act in explicitly symbolic terms: the mace represents the Speaker’s authority given by the Bahamian people, and he framed his action as “giving power back to the people” (Reuters, 2024, ‘Bahamas suspends parliament after lawmaker throws symbolic mace out window,’ 5 December; The Guardian, 2024, ‘Chaos in Bahamas parliament as MP throws ceremonial mace out of window,’ 5 December).

Now let me be blunt: every Bahamian knew what was happening here. The move was meant to evoke the same feeling as Black Tuesday (27 April 1965), when Sir Lynden Pindling threw the mace out of the window amid a serious dispute over gerrymandered boundaries and political legitimacy (ZNS Bahamas, 2023, ‘Remembering Black Tuesday,’ 28 April; The Tribune (Bahamas), 2024 ‘Law and Disorder,’ 5 December). That moment is remembered because it dramatized a constitutional argument: that authority is not merely procedure; it must be earned through fairness. However, Cartwright’s action did not strike the same chord. It echoed the gesture, yes. It borrowed the imagery, yes. But it did not inherit the same historical weight.

In my view, it cheapened the original meaning by turning what was once a grave national rupture into a replay-able stunt. When Pindling did it, it was a serious point in our history. It was tied to a foundational struggle over representation and legitimacy. When Cartwright did it, it landed as tawdry. Recycling the action was in some ways insulting, as it was an attempt to train the public to see this sacred and symbolic action casually, as just another prop.

Additionally, when Parliament becomes theatre, it becomes harder to separate legitimate protest from pure performance. The Tribune’s coverage captured how quickly the incident turned into competing claims about whether it was spontaneous or planned, and it became part of a wider narrative battle rather than an institutional turning point (The Tribune (Bahamas), 2024 ‘Law and Disorder,’ 5 December; The Tribune (Bahamas), 2024, ‘White denies assisting Cartwright’s toss of mace,’ 10 December; The Guardian, 2024, ‘Chaos in Bahamas parliament as MP throws ceremonial mace out of window,’ 5 December). That is what spectacle does: it turns governance into a content cycle.

The second case study that I would like to discuss relates to another MP from the same party, Adrian White. His actions serve as another example of how symbolic politics operates today and what actions can signal about who deserves respect. In April 2025, The Tribune reported backlash after White described FNM supporters as “sensible” voters and singled out Englerston as the only constituency never to have voted FNM (The Tribune (Bahamas), 2025, ‘Englerston backlash after White’s claim “sensible voters vote FNM”’, 24 April). Prime Minister Philip Davis publicly criticised the framing, rejecting the implication that voters on one side are sensible while others are not (The Tribune (Bahamas) (2025) ‘Davis criticises White’s comment that FNM voters are only “sensible” ones’, 28 April). This matters because it is not just a political jab, it is identity politics by insult. It tells Bahamians: some of you are rational citizens; the rest of you are… what? Foolish? Irrational? Beneath the others? In a small democracy, that framing is not strategy, it is gasoline.

Furthermore, in the aftermath of the mace-window situation discussed above, White found himself in further political theatre, when The Tribune reported that he denied assisting Cartwright, saying the window was already open and he only pulled back a curtain (The Tribune (Bahamas), 2024, ‘White denies assisting Cartwright’s toss of mace,’ 10 December). Regardless of whether or not he did provide any assistance, the episode illustrates how quickly parliamentary protest can look choreographed; at which point the public stops hearing “principle” and starts hearing “production.”

Moreover, in November 2025, a video showing White stepping on Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) paraphernalia went viral. He reportedly said he had no regrets and would do it again, while also describing racial attacks he said he received after the incident (The Tribune (Bahamas), 2025, ‘PLP aspirant slams MP Adrian White for “defaming” party poster,’ 4 November; The Tribune (Bahamas), 2025, ‘White: I have no reason to apologize for being Bahamian,’ 6 November). This is humiliation politics. Not persuasion. Not debate. Humiliation. And here is where I want to invoke something we do not talk about enough in Bahamian politics: good sportsmanship. Yes, politics is competition, but it is supposed to be competition with rules, restraint and respect. Especially considering we pride ourselves on being a decent people. Decency is not weakness. Decency is social glue. Thus, when an MP performs contemptuously publicly and gleefully, what exactly are we modelling for our children? That disagreement means disrespect? That the “win” justifies degradation? That politics is about dominance, not service? If adults behave like this in full view of the nation, the nation should not pretend to be shocked when the public, especially the young, returns the same energy.

Although my writing thus far has used two FNM examples, make no mistake that the PLP has members that are guilty of this theatrical behaviour as well. The Tribune documented a 2009 clash in the House of Assembly, where Speaker Alvin Smith demanded an apology from Frank Smith (then PLP MP for the St Thomas More Constituency) for disorderly conduct. A related Tribune report described an incident in which Smith allegedly attempted to shout over Kwasi Thompson and move his microphone during proceedings (The Tribune (Bahamas), 2009, ‘Speaker demands Smith apology,’ 23 February; The Tribune (Bahamas), 2009, ‘New low over House assault,’ 23 February). Most obviously, Black Tuesday itself was led by the PLP’s then-opposition leader. To be clear, however, the point is not “both sides are the same.” The point is that spectacle is a political incentive in our environment, and any party can fall into it when attention becomes the metric.

All these examples highlight how multifaceted the exercise of power is, where politics becomes performative. Performative politics is not “just optics.” It is power because it sets the agenda for what is discussed, defines legitimacy and signals dominance for who can disrespect whom without consequence. Most distressingly however, it re-trains public expectations from accountability to entertainment. Political science language helps name the mechanism. Scholars describe populist style through “bad manners” and “the low” as a performance that signals authenticity “telling it like it is” and treats norm-breaking as proof of strength.

So, the real tragedy is not that politicians sometimes perform. The tragedy is that we have begun to accept performance as leadership and this is how power now operates as a feedback loop. A spectacle occurs, the public reacts, institutions respond slowly if at all, cynicism hardens and the next spectacle becomes easier because the standard has already fallen. This toxic loop does not produce reform.

Spectacle is not always the enemy. Symbolism can spotlight injustice and concentrate public pressure, and Bahamian history shows that disciplined disruption can force elites to respond. But spectacle becomes civic poison when it is used for humiliation instead of institutional change, teaching us that politics is about degrading opponents rather than strengthening the rules that govern everyone. If a politician wants to use spectacle responsibly, then it must come with receipts: a clear institutional demand, a measurable reform goal, a timeline and follow-through — otherwise it is not protest, but content. In moments of collapsing public trust, especially around policing and governance, the only honest destination is implementation and enforcement, not declarations.

I’ll end here by saying Cartwright’s mace throw and White’s antics aren’t random incidents, they’re local symptoms of the post-Obama shift toward Trump-era, attention-driven politics, where performance is power and contempt is marketed as “real.” Spectacle in Bahamian politics isn’t new; what’s new and dangerous is how normalised it has become, even celebrated, as if decency is weakness and disruption is leadership. But leadership is not content. Leadership is responsibility. If we keep rewarding degradation as authenticity, we teach our children that politics is dominance, not service. In a small democracy, that makes governance optional, which is far more than tacky: it is dangerous.

References

Aiolfi, T. (2022) ‘Populism as a Transgressive Style’, Global Studies Quarterly, 2(1), ksac006. doi: 10.1093/isagsq/ksac006.

Brady, W.J., Wills, J.A., Jost, J.T., Tucker, J.A. and Van Bavel, J.J. (2017) ‘Emotion shapes the diffusion of moralized content in social networks’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(28), pp. 7313–7318. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1618923114.

Moffitt, B. (2016) The Global Rise of Populism: Performance, Political Style, and Representation. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Ostiguy, P. (2009) ‘The High–Low Political Divide: Rethinking Populism and Anti-Populism’, Political Concepts: Committee on Concepts and Methods Working Paper Series, №35 (November). Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309126989_The_High-Low_Divide_Rethinking_Populism_and_Anti-Populism (Accessed: 4 March 2026).

Reuters (2024) ‘Bahamas suspends parliament after lawmaker throws symbolic mace out window’, 5 December. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/bahamas-suspends-parliament-after-lawmaker-throws-symbolic-mace-out-window-2024-12-04/ (Accessed: 4 March 2026).

The Guardian (2024) ‘Chaos in Bahamas parliament as MP throws ceremonial mace out of window’, 5 December. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/dec/05/bahamas-parliament-ceremonial-mace (Accessed: 4 March 2026).

The Tribune (Bahamas) (2009a) ‘Speaker demands Smith apology’, 23 February. Available at: https://www.tribune242.com/news/2009/feb/23/speaker-demands-smith-apology/ (Accessed: 4 March 2026).

The Tribune (Bahamas) (2009b) ‘New low over house assault’, 23 February. Available at: https://www.tribune242.com/news/2009/feb/23/new-low-over-house-assault/ (Accessed: 4 March 2026).

The Tribune (Bahamas) (2024a) ‘Law and disorder’, 5 December. Available at: https://www.tribune242.com/news/2024/dec/05/law-and-disorder/ (Accessed: 4 March 2026).

The Tribune (Bahamas) (2024b) ‘White denies assisting in Cartwright’s toss of mace’, 10 December. Available at: https://www.tribune242.com/news/2024/dec/10/white-denies-assisting-in-cartwrights-toss-of-mace/ (Accessed: 4 March 2026).

The Tribune (Bahamas) (2025a) ‘Englerston backlash after White’s claim “sensible voters vote FNM”’, 24 April. Available at: https://www.tribune242.com/news/2025/apr/24/englerston-backlash-after-whites-claim-sensible-voters-vote-fnm/ (Accessed: 4 March 2026).

The Tribune (Bahamas) (2025b) ‘Davis criticises White’s comment that FNM voters are only “sensible” ones’, 28 April. Available at: https://www.tribune242.com/news/2025/apr/28/davis-criticises-whites-comment-that-fnm-voters-are-only-sensible-ones/ (Accessed: 4 March 2026).

The Tribune (Bahamas) (2025c) ‘PLP aspirant slams MP Adrian White for “defaming” party poster’, 4 November. Available at: https://www.tribune242.com/news/2025/nov/04/plp-aspirant-slams-mp-adrian-white-for-defaming-party-poster/ (Accessed: 4 March 2026).

The Tribune (Bahamas) (2025d) ‘White: I have no reason to apologize for being Bahamian’, 6 November. Available at: https://www.tribune242.com/news/2025/nov/06/white-i-have-no-reason-to-apologize-for-being-bahamian/ (Accessed: 4 March 2026).

ZNS Bahamas (2023) ‘Remembering Black Tuesday’, 28 April. Available at: https://znsbahamas.com/remembering-black-tuesday/ (Accessed: 4 March 2026).