Affective Polarization of a Protest and a Counterprotest: Million MAGA March v. Million Moron March

Abstract

Protest movements around the world have become increasingly likely to incite counterprotests that adopt an opposing stance. This study examines how a protest and a counterprotest interact with and shape each other as digitally networked connective action. My empirical focus is the so-called Million MAGA March—in which supporters of U.S. President Donald Trump protested the “stealing” of the November 2020 election by his rival, Joe Biden—and a counterprotest that erupted simultaneously. Drawing on a computational mixed-methods approach to examine two corpora of tweets featuring hashtags used by protesters and counterprotesters, respectively, the study identifies three mutually reinforcing dimensions of protest–counterprotest interaction: affective repertoires, discursive strategies, and network structures. It argues that “affective polarization”—or negative partisanship driven by hostility toward an outgroup—offers a useful conceptual means of understanding the significance of affect and collective identity in digital social movements, especially protest–counterprotest interactions. In doing so, the study also addresses concerns that “big data” methods are insensitive to the role of identity and expressive communication in social movements. Finally, the study demonstrates how online and offline political action are mutually constitutive aspects of contemporary contentious politics.

Affective Polarization: Not Always Between Ingroup Vs Outgroup (Evidence from Twitter Conversation with Keywords Jokowi and PDIP)

“…The rapid development of the digital era, supported by policies related to campaign methods, has influenced changes in social and political interactions. Online and offline political actions are interconnected constitutive aspects in contemporary controversial politics [33]. Indonesia is a democratic country that uses an open election system with low party-voter proximity.…”

‘A lot of people still love and worship the monarchy’: How polarizing frames trigger countermobilization in Thailand

“…Hashtags do not only generate the high connectivity necessary for mobilizing potential supporters, but viral hashtags also create movements’ visibility and ‘narrative capacity’ to spread their world-view (Tufekci, 2017: 192). For our purpose, hashtags may have ‘non-resonance problems,’ as with offline frames, that escalate conflicts instead of creating solidarity, trigger eruptions of counterframes, and set the stage for countermobilization (Nikolayenko, 2019; Shahin, 2022).…”

“…The attribution of countermobilization to governments and regimes downplays autonomous elements within countermovements, which can be mobilized upon the perception of existential threats (Bessinger, 2020: 142). A movement’s frames may shape this perception by targeting core markers of identity to which countermovements subscribe (Meyer & Staggenborg, 1996; Shahin, 2022). And while scholars (e.g.…”

“…Satha-Anand, 2020). Such dynamics entail 'affect and collective identity' beyond 'differences in opinion about policy' (Shahin, 2022). The opposite of this trait are the frames such as Occupy Wall Street's 'We are the 99 percent,' which employs the language of solidarity and highlights a common experience for the majority of the population, regardless of their religion, gender, or race.…”