ABSTRACT
Elections, at their face value, are institutionalized contests for public positions that pit contending individuals and groups of (professional) politicians against each other. These contests are governed by formal legislation, and compliance with set procedures establishes the legitimacy of a victor’s claim to the post. However, elections are more than just exercises in filling up vacancies in the state apparatus that give winning individuals a right to rule. An internally valid election grants legitimacy not only to the winner but to the social structure as a whole. Moreover, elections can be seen as a ritualized social practice, with each election filled with ritual performances that may be engaging or off-putting depending on the sociopolitical context, the candidates running for office, the participating voters, and the audience at large. In the unfolding of this ritual may be found a basis for legitimacy and consent to hegemony, in addition to, or even rather than, formal rules and procedural equality per se. As Geertz (1983: 144-146) hinted, despite the deployment of a different set of idioms compared with ancient rulers and wielders of charisma, modern politics retains ritualism at its core, indicative of ‘the inherent sacredness of central authority’.
