Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Wednesday May 03 2017, @06:11AM   Printer-friendly
from the on-the-periphery dept.

The massive Arab Spring protests that began in late December 2010 and spread from North Africa to the Middle East generated huge crowds and had quick and profound effects—including the overthrow of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, who had held a firm grip on the country for decades.

Was this the work of people at the core of networks trying for years to create such a movement? Not according to research by Zachary Steinert-Threlkeld, assistant professor of public policy at the UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs.

In a paper published in American Political Science Review, Steinert-Threlkeld argues that individuals not central to a social network may be more responsible for generating collective action and driving protest than those at the center. Steinert-Threlkeld calls his theory of the periphery's ability to mobilize "spontaneous collective action."

"Protests occur as a result of decentralized coordination of individuals, and this coordination helps explain fluctuating levels of protest," Steinert-Threlkeld wrote.

[...] "Having someone tell you, 'Hey, I'm going to protest tomorrow' is much less impactful than having multiple people tell you they are protesting tomorrow," he said. Large groups of people, as opposed to a few central individuals, are able to discuss "where to go, how to get there, when to go," as well as what is going on once there, Steinert-Threlkeld added. In addition, individuals debating whether or not to protest must receive a credible signal that large numbers of people are protesting.

The Mubarak regime initially arrested the leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood because it assumed they were the only ones able to organize such large protests.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by tfried on Wednesday May 03 2017, @08:19AM (3 children)

    by tfried (5534) on Wednesday May 03 2017, @08:19AM (#503526)

    Too lazy to RTFA - I do wonder how the author is trying to tell the direction of causation, methodologically. I do think there is a lot of truth to his interpretation: "normal people are tweeting about going to the protest is causing the protest to become a mass-movement". But how to tell this from "the protest is becoming a mass-movement, and as a result normal people are becoming engaged". In fact, to some degree, both views look rather tautological.

    I agree, it seems interesting to note that mass-coordination did not require any central figures, and so the strategy to arrest assumed central figures could not save the regime. But what caused people to coordinate in the first place, where was the momentum coming from?

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 03 2017, @09:51AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 03 2017, @09:51AM (#503538)

    I have been through this before. It works like this: you, a commoner, are not doing well, and/or you see despicable, very visible characters, rise to various amounts of power and wealth undeserved. There is some criticism and dissent going on in press or in public. The authority at the top puts dissenters and critics under pressure. You start to feel that whole structure of power is just a vehicle for injustice, oppression and theft. But at this point you are still too scared to openly revolt. However, the public protests break up, and you feel a little bit more empowered by security in numbers, so you join them. If there are your friends or family with you, you feel even more invulnerable and righteous. At this point, putting in more force against protesters only makes the flames go higher. That's why in very experienced regimes, such as "western democracies", protesters are just left out to dissipate and decay, and there are usually some inconsequential and medium-time-temporary bribes for the masses after the protests wane. It is hard to fight successfully for social change in Huxley's Brave New World. Nowadays, they'll even throw you false issues to fight about, and divide the prols, thus ensuring that immanent potential for revolution is channeled into void.

    • (Score: 2) by edIII on Wednesday May 03 2017, @08:28PM

      by edIII (791) on Wednesday May 03 2017, @08:28PM (#503924)

      I don't know about Twitter and social networks, as I don't participate at all, but the Arab Spring was really started by one man setting himself on fire.

      Setting himself on fire in of itself is not what started it.

      You start to feel that whole structure of power is just a vehicle for injustice, oppression and theft. But at this point you are still too scared to openly revolt. However, the public protests break up, and you feel a little bit more empowered by security in numbers, so you join them. If there are your friends or family with you, you feel even more invulnerable and righteous. At this point, putting in more force against protesters only makes the flames go higher.

      Mohamed Bouazizi [wikipedia.org] was a young man that was pushed to the edge by the abuses of those in power. They confiscated everything he needed to survive in much the same way as local U.S cops will confiscate everything a homeless person has, so that they start over after they are abused by those in power and then discarded into the street like trash.

      That I think is what started it more than anything. Not normal people driving it, but normal people finally abused so heinously to the point they break. When one person finally self-immolates, what does it do the people around them that are on that edge too? That also feel injustice is the nature of their world, and that theft from those in power is the rule and not the exception?

      The people of Tunisia would not have reacted like that if Mohamed's experience had not resonated so powerfully with them. Why did they all feel such connection with an abused man that had nothing left, nowhere to go, and no choices left but suicide? Those are dangerous levels of disenfranchisement.

      Which is precisely why an American Spring is on the way. Tens of thousands of people that wholly depend on health care just to survive will have no choice but to kill themselves, or face life on the streets as a sick and disabled person. The American Spring will start when the racism and bigotry of the White Nationalists is matched with the abject suffering of the weak watched by normal every day Americans.

      It's not ordinary people that will drive this, but an ordinary response to the disenfranchisement, disillusionment, and outright evil treatment of the weak. Americans, probably, still have some heart left. When they give away the huge tax breaks to the rich, take away whatever help their is for the poor and disenfranchised, and send people with pre-existing conditions to the de facto slaughter houses of the streets you will see an explosion.

      Critical mass will be reached when the Middle Class is drained out to fill up the Poor, and the Upper class armors themselves as the defense against the Owning Class.

      The American Spring is coming for the same reason. It will be too painful and disruptive to watch that many Americans die in the streets, doing nothing, while the 1% continues their parasitic and avaricious ways.

      --
      Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
  • (Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Wednesday May 03 2017, @04:33PM

    by LoRdTAW (3755) on Wednesday May 03 2017, @04:33PM (#503746) Journal

    Too lazy to RTFA...

    Go back to slashdot.