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

• Author: Dina Bishara
• Published date: 01 September 2021
• Date: 01 September 2021
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/0010414020970227
• Subject Matter: Articles

2021, Vol. 54(10) 1722 –1756

https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414020970227

Comparative Political Studies

© The Author(s) 2021

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0010414020970227

journals.sagepub.com/home/cps

Article

The Generative Power of

Protest: Time and Space

in Contentious Politics

Dina Bishara1

Abstract

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.

Keywords

contentious politics, protest, authoritarianism, social movements, Middle East

Introduction

How and why do social movements sustain themselves under authoritarian

rule? This remains a crucial puzzle for scholars of comparative politics (Fu,

2018; Johnston, 2015; Ketchley, 2017; Pearlman, 2013; Wickham, 2002).

1Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA

Corresponding Author:

Dina Bishara, ILR School, 365 Ives Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA.

Email: db833@cornell.edu

970227

CPSXXX10.1177/0010414020970227Comparative Political StudiesBishara

research-article

2021

Bishara 1723

2 Comparative Political Studies 00(0)

Scholarship on collective action and protest politics focuses primarily on

why citizens engage in protest (Corrigall-Brown, 2012; Gurr, 1970; Olson,

1965; Pinard, 2011; Wood, 2001), how governments respond to their mobili-

zation (Carey, 2009; Conrad, 2011; Davenport et al., 2005; Goldstone &

Tilly, 2001), and the conditions under which citizens succeed in achieving

their demands (Amenta & Caren, 2004; Gamson, 1975; Piven, 1977). Yet, we

know far less about how social movements expand or deepen their networks

even under authoritarian conditions.

This article gains leverage on this puzzle by foregrounding the generative

power of protest, namely the power of protest events themselves to shape

internal movement dynamics. Notably, this article does not seek to offer a

comprehensive account of the conditions under which movements sustain

themselves. Instead, in line with recent scholarship on “eventful protests”

(Della Porta, 2008, 2018), it takes seriously the notion that organizational

capacity and collective identities are not always precursors to mobilization

(Della Porta, 2008; Feigenbaum et al., 2013; Hunt & Benford, 2004; Mische,

2008; Tarrow, 1998). Instead, they are often produced over the course of pro-

test. Recognizing the long-standing scholarly interest in the factors that drive

mobilization, this article shifts attention to protest experiences themselves,

arguing that these experiences have important effects on movement sustain-

ability, regardless of the factors that might have facilitated or inhibited mobi-

lization in the first place.

Moving beyond the study of protest as a “dependent variable” (Della

Porta, 2008; p.27), this article builds on recent work to theorize the effects of

protest events themselves on internal movement outcomes. This analysis

contributes to existing scholarship in two main ways. First, it explores how

different modalities of protest might differentially affect internal movement

dynamics. Second, it foregrounds the interaction between temporal and spa-

tial dimensions of protest, especially duration and geographic scope, whereas

previous work had treated them separately.

This article focuses on two primary dimensions of movement sustainabil-

ity: (1) deepening; and (2) broadening. Deepening encompasses processes of

identity formation and the development of organizational infrastructures.

Collective identity building refers to the development of deeper bonds and

feelings of solidarity among protest participants. Organization building refers

to the emergence of organizational structures previously not in place, or the

expansion of existing organizational structures. These processes are related

in the sense that they deepen movements by allowing them greater capacity

to act as cohesive collective actors. Broadening is more concerned with

movement breadth and encompasses the diversification of movement partici-

pants and the expansion of the movement’s social base. Following Tarrow, I

1724 Comparative Political Studies 54(10)

Bishara 3

define social movements as “collective challenges, based on common pur-

poses and social solidarities, in sustained interaction with elites, opponents,

and authorities” (2011, p. 9). This article focuses on how protest events affect

the deepening and broadening of social movements.

Bridging research on the generative power of protest and the literature on

time and space in the study of contentious politics, I contend that different

forms of protest have varying effects on movement building outcomes

depending on their duration and geographic scope. I distinguish between four

categories of protest actions on the basis of duration and geographic scope

(see Figure 1) and argue that their distinctive temporal and spatial configura-

tions differentially affect movement deepening and broadening.

Short, single-site actions, such as flash demonstrations, have limited

transformative effects in terms of movement deepening and broadening.

Given their fleeting nature, and their limited geographic scope, these actions

do not permit the development of deeper ties among participants, nor do they

Short

Single-site actions

(e.g flash

demonstrations)

Limited Transformative

Effects

Short

Mulitiple-site actions

(e.g. marches covering

different areas)

Movement broadening

Extended

Single-siteactions

(e.g. overnight sit-ins)

Movement deepening

Extended

Multiple-site actions

(e.g. regional uprisings)

Broadening and Deepening

Short

Duration

Extended

Geographic Scope

Single-Site Multiple Sites

Figure 1. Generative Power of Protest.