A Zero-Sum Game? Repression and Protest in China

Li, Yao

doi:10.1017/gov.2017.24

Cited by 41 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It may also tolerate short protests on some occasions, but not others. As research on the determinants of regime response to protest suggests, this may depend on a number of other considerations, including protest size, the nature of demands, the degree to which protests are linked to organized groups, the peacefulness of protest tactics, and the identity of protesters (Cai, 2010;Carey, 2009;Davenport et al, 2011;Goldstone & Tilly, 2001;Li, 2019). As such, while protest duration and geographic scope may affect, they do not consistently determine repression.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Generative Power of Protest: Time and Space in Contentious Politics

Bishara

2021

Comparative Political Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How do social movements sustain themselves under authoritarian rule? This remains a crucial puzzle for scholars of comparative politics. This article gains traction on this puzzle by foregrounding the generative power of protest, namely the power of protest experiences themselves to deepen and broaden movements. Some studies have started to draw attention to those questions without yet systematically examining how the form of protest differentially affects those outcomes. I argue that different forms of protest have varying effects on movements depending on their duration and geographic scope. While short, multiple-site actions, such as marches, can broaden movements by expanding their base, extended, single-site actions, such as sit-ins, are more likely to deepen movements by fostering collective identities and building organizational capacities. This article is based on field research in Egypt, Tunisia, Jordan, and Morocco and interviews with more than 100 movement participants and civil society activists.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Generative Power of Protest: Time and Space in Contentious Politics

Bishara

2021

Comparative Political Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, popular mass mobilization typically triggers a repressive backlash by political authorities in both democracies and authoritarian regimes (Carey, 2006; Davenport, 1995a; McAdam, 1986). Yet, the personal risk involved in contentious participation is particularly high in the latter, for autocracies seldom ever hold back from deploying the full menu of coercive capacities, resulting in prolonged jail time, torture, or death (Li, 2019). The threat of such repressive actions is severe and certain, and overcoming personal risk perceptions remains the key factor in explaining popular mass mobilization (Kuran, 1991).…”

Section: Theorizing Revolutionary Changementioning

confidence: 99%

Revolutionary mass uprisings in authoritarian regimes

Albrecht

Koehler

2020

International Area Studies Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores the conditions under which revolutionary mass uprisings are likely to occur. We offer a probabilistic explanation of the social and political conditions that make people rise against autocrats. The article presents a medium-n dataset of 79 revolutionary mass uprisings in 165 autocracies since 1945. Since revolutions are rare events, a combination of factors must come together to trigger them. Drawing on the extant literature on revolutionary change, we find initial support for a range of discrete factors. Our findings suggest that four such factors are particularly powerful explanations of revolutionary mass uprisings—and a combination of those factors will go a long way in predicting revolutionary change: a history of protracted low-level popular contention; the presence of personalist regimes; long tenure of incumbents in office; and the showroom effect of uprisings in the temporal and spatial vicinity of states. In a broader theoretical perspective, these findings give rise to a breaking-point explanation of revolutionary situations, emphasizing that mass uprisings build up over time, whereas structuralist theories or grievance-based approaches fare less well in predicting revolutionary ruptures.

show abstract

“…24 Davenport 2007. 25 Cai 2010Li 2019. empirically imperative to examine how the Chinese regime responds to resource conflicts.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Repress or Redistribute? The Chinese State's Response to Resource Conflicts

Zhan¹

2021

The China Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is widely assumed that authoritarian states tend to use repression to suffocate social conflicts that threaten regime stability. Focusing on the Chinese state's responses to resource conflict, a particular type of social conflict triggered by mineral resource extraction, this research argues that authoritarian regimes may prefer to use redistributive policies to defuse social unrest under certain circumstances. Through mixed methods combining qualitative research and statistical analysis, I find that local governments in resource-rich regions do not spend heavily on coercive state apparatus. Instead, they generously hand out social security benefits to appease aggrieved citizens. Furthermore, the Chinese state actively involves mining companies in the redistribution process and requires them to share the financial costs of relief policies. Therefore, when conflicts arise between specific social groups with conflicting interests, redistribution may be a more effective strategy to preserve regime stability.

show abstract

A Zero-Sum Game? Repression and Protest in China

Cited by 41 publications

References 49 publications

The Generative Power of Protest: Time and Space in Contentious Politics

The Generative Power of Protest: Time and Space in Contentious Politics

Revolutionary mass uprisings in authoritarian regimes

Repress or Redistribute? The Chinese State's Response to Resource Conflicts

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About