Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-02T04:48:06.670Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Does repression undermine opposition demands? The case of the Hong Kong National Security Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 October 2021

Tetsuro Kobayashi Open the ORCID record for Tetsuro Kobayashi [Opens in a new window] ,
Jaehyun Song Open the ORCID record for Jaehyun Song [Opens in a new window]  and
Polly Chan Open the ORCID record for Polly Chan [Opens in a new window]
Tetsuro Kobayashi*
Affiliation:
City University of Hong Kong, M5088, 5/F, Run Run Shaw Creative Media Centre, 18 Tat Hong Avenue, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong
Jaehyun Song
Affiliation:
Kansai University, 2-1-1 Ryozenji-cho, Takatsuki, Osaka569-1095, Japan
Polly Chan
Affiliation:
St Antony's College, University of Oxford, 62 Woodstock Road, OxfordOX2 6JF, UK
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: tkobayas@cityu.edu.hk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Does political repression extinguish public support for opposition demands? Protest emerges as a consequence of grievances and political preferences expressed as demands. Although the literature on the repression–dissent nexus has primarily focused on whether repression effectively deters dissenting behavior, a limitation is that researchers do not often distinguish between behavior and preferences. One possible implication is that although the observable protest behavior can be reduced by repression, underlying opposition demands may remain intact or even be strengthened. Hence, the question of why repression should alter public preferences remains theoretically under-investigated, because there is limited micro-level evidence that captures changes in opposition preferences induced by a repressive episode. We fielded comparable conjoint experiments before and after the enactment of the Hong Kong National Security Law in June 2020. Support for the demands was largely stable despite the sweeping powers of the law to curb protests, although some moderation of demands was observed. We outline avenues for future research on mechanisms and implications entailed by the effects of repression on preferences.

Keywords

Conjoint experimentHong Kongpolicy preferenceprotestrepression
Type
Research Article
Information
Japanese Journal of Political Science , Volume 22 , Issue 4 , December 2021 , pp. 268 - 286
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abrahms, M (2006) Why terrorism does not work. International Security 31, 42–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abrahms, M (2012) The political effectiveness of terrorism revisited. Comparative Political Studies 45, 366–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
al-Anani, K (2019) Rethinking the repression-dissent nexus: assessing Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood's response to repression since the coup of 2013. Democratization 26, 1329–1341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Almeida, PD (2003) Opportunity organizations and threat-induced contention: protest waves in authoritarian settings. American Journal of Sociology 109, 345–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aytaç, SE, Schiumerini, L and Stokes, S (2018) Why do people join backlash protests? Lessons from Turkey. Journal of Conflict Resolution 62, 1205–1228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bansak, K, Hainmueller, J, Hopkins, DJ and Yamamoto, T (2020) Conjoint survey experiments. In Druckman, JN and Green, DP (eds), Cambridge Handbook of Advances in Experimental Political Science. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, pp. 19–41.Google Scholar
Brockett, CD (1993) A protest-cycle resolution of the repression/popular-protest paradox. Social Science History 17, 457–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Centre for Communication and Public Opinion Survey (2019) Opinion survey on the Fugitive Offenders and Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Legislation (Amendment) Bill (Fifth round). Available at https://video3.mingpao.com/inews/201910/20191015_mpsurvey.pdf (Accessed 19 August 2021).Google Scholar
Chenoweth, E (2020) The future of nonviolent resistance. Journal of Democracy 31, 69–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chenoweth, E and Ulfelder, J (2017) Can structural conditions explain the onset of nonviolent uprisings? Journal of Conflict Resolution 61, 298–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costalli, S and Ruggeri, A (2015) Indignation, ideologies, and armed mobilization: civil war in Italy, 1943–45. International Security 40, 119–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curtice, TB and Behlendorf, B (2021) Street-level repression: protest, policing, and dissent in Uganda. Journal of Conflict Resolution 65, 166–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davenport, C (2007) State repression and political order. Annual Review of Political Science 10, 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davenport, C and Inman, M (2012) The state of state repression research since the 1990s. Terrorism and Political Violence 24, 619–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Jaegher, K and Hoyer, B (2019) Preemptive repression: deterrence, backfiring, iron fists, and velvet gloves. Journal of Conflict Resolution 63, 502–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Della Porta, D (2013) Can Democracy be Saved? Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Earl, J (2011a) Protest arrests and future protest participation: the 2004 republican national convention arrestees and the effects of repression. In Sarat, A (ed.), Studies in Law, Politics, and Society. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 141–173.Google Scholar
Earl, J (2011b) Political repression: iron fists, velvet gloves, and diffuse control. Annual Review of Sociology 37, 261–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, J and Pfaff, S (2001) Emotion work in high-risk social movements: managing fear in the US and east German civil rights movements. In Goodwin, J, Jasper, JM and Polletta, F (eds), Passionate Politics: Emotions and Social Movements. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, pp. 282–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granovetter, M (1978) Threshold models of collective behavior. American Journal of Sociology 83, 1420–1443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hess, D and Martin, B (2006) Repression, backfire, and the theory of transformative events. Mobilization: An International Quarterly 11, 249–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horiuchi, Y, Markovich, ZD and Yamamoto, T (2020) Does conjoint analysis mitigate social desirability bias?. MIT Political Science Department Research Paper No. 2018-15.Google Scholar
Kalyvas, SN and Kocher, MA (2007) How ‘free’ is free riding in civil wars?: violence, insurgency, and the collective action problem. World Politics 59, 177–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klandermans, B (1984) Mobilization and participation: social-psychological expansions of resource mobilization theory. American Sociological Review 49, 583–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klandermans, B (2003) A theoretical framework for comparisons of social movement participation. Sociological Forum 8, 383–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klandermans, B (2004) The demand and supply of participation: social-psychological correlates of participation in social movements. In Snow, DA, Soule, SA and Kriesi, H (eds), The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, pp. 360–379.Google Scholar
Klandermans, B and van Stekelenburg, J (2013) Social movements and the dynamics of collective action. In Huddy, L, Sears, DO and Levy, JS (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology, 2nd Edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 774–811.Google Scholar
Klandermans, B, van der Toorn, J and van Stekelenburg, J (2008) Embeddedness and identity: how immigrants turn grievances into action. American Sociological Review 73, 992–1012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, GR and Regan, PM (2018) Dynamics of political protests. International Organization 72, 485–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kobayashi, T (2021) Preference falsification in “authoritarianizing” contexts: The case of Hong Kong. Paper presented at ISPP Eastern Hemisphere Virtual Seminar Series, 26 February.Google Scholar
Koopmans, R (1997) Dynamics of repression and mobilization: the German extreme right in the 1990s. Mobilization: An International Quarterly 2, 149–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuran, T (1989) Sparks and prairie fires: a theory of unanticipated political revolution. Public Choice 61, 41–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuran, T (1991) Now out of never: the element of surprise in the east European revolution of 1989. World Politics 44, 7–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuran, T (1997) Private Truths, Public Lies. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Lee, FLF (2020) Solidarity in the anti-extradition bill movement in Hong Kong. Critical Asian Studies 52, 18–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, FLF, Tang, G, Yuen, S and Cheng, EW (2020) Five demands and not quite beyond: Claim making and ideology in Hong Kong's anti-extradition bill movement. Communist and Post-Communist Studies 53, 22–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, FLF, Yuen, S, Tang, G and Cheng, EW (2019) Hong Kong's summer of uprising: from anti-extradition to anti-authoritarian protests. The China Review 19, 1–32.Google Scholar
Leonardi, R, Nanetti, RY and Putnam, RD (1981) Devolution as a political process: the case of Italy. Publius: The Journal of Federalism 11, 95–118.Google Scholar
Lichbach, MI (1987) Deterrence or escalation?: the puzzle of aggregate studies of repression and dissent. Journal of Conflict Resolution 31, 266–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lorentzen, PL (2013) Regularizing rioting: permitting public protest in an authoritarian regime. Quarterly Journal of Political Science 8, 127–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maher, TV (2010) Threat, resistance, and collective action: the cases of Sobibór, Treblinka, and Auschwitz. American Sociological Review 75, 252–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miura, A and Kobayashi, T (2016) Survey satisficing inflates stereotypical responses in online experiment: the case of immigration study. Frontiers in Psychology 7, 1563.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moore, WH (1998) Repression and dissent: substitution, context, and timing. American Journal of Political Science 42, 861–873.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Brien, KJ and Deng, Y (2015) Repression backfires: tactical radicalization and protest spectacle in rural China. Journal of Contemporary China 24, 457–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Opp, K-D and Roehl, W (1990) Repression, micromobilization, and political protest. Social Forces 69, 521–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oppenheimer, DM, Meyvis, T and Davidenko, N (2009) Instructional manipulation checks: detecting satisficing to increase statistical power. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 45, 867–872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearlman, W (2013) Emotions and the microfoundations of the Arab uprisings. Perspectives on Politics 11, 387–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rasler, K (1996) Concessions, repression, and political protest in the Iranian revolution. American Sociological Review 61, 132–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, HL and Lafree, GD (1986) Deterrence in criminology and social policy. In Smelser, NJ and Gerstein, DR (eds), Behavioral and Social Science: 50 Years of Discovery. Washington, DC: National Research Council, pp. 129–152.Google Scholar
Rothman, J and Olson, ML (2001) From interests to identities: towards a new emphasis in interactive conflict resolution. Journal of Peace Research 38, 289–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shao, G (2019) Longstanding economic frustration is fueling Hong Kong's protests, expert says. CNBC, May 8. Available at https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/05/hong-kong-protests-fueled-by-longstanding-economic-frustration.html (Accessed 11 January 2021).Google Scholar
Steinert-Threlkeld, S and Steinert-Threlkeld, Z (2021) How social networks affect the repression-dissent puzzle. PLoS One 15, e250784.Google Scholar
Stott, C, Ho, L, Radburn, M, Chan, YT, Kyprianides, A and Morales, PS (2020) Patterns of ‘disorder’ during the 2019 protests in Hong Kong: policing, social identity, intergroup dynamics, and radicalization. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice 14, 814–835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sullivan, CM, Loyle, CE and Davenport, C (2012) The coercive weight of the past: temporal dependence and the conflict-repression nexus in the Northern Ireland ‘Troubles’. International Interactions 38, 426–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tang, G and Yuen, S (2020) ‘Gwok on faat chin hau: Faan sau lai wan dung ji chi je jam yeung jyun bin liu?’ [How Have Supporters of the Anti-Extradition Bill Movement Changed Before and After the Hong Kong National Security Law?]. MingPao, December 27. Available at https://news.mingpao.com/pns/副刊/article/20201227/s00005/1609006490178/周日話題-國安法前後-反修例運動支持者怎樣轉變了?fbclid=IwAR25gjp13aL0S45KPzF3lXQ7dX0mrQU9b7SOJsD8AGNkMLphZPZHKldA-TM (Accessed 18 August 2021).Google Scholar
Tarrow, SG (1989) Struggle, Politics, and Reform: Collective Action, Social Movement, and Cycles of Protest. Ithaca, NY: Center for International Studies, Cornell University.Google Scholar
Taylor, V (1989) Social movement continuity: the women's movement in abeyance. American Sociological Review 54, 761–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, V and Crossley, AD (2013) Abeyance. In Snow, DA, Della Porta, D, Klandermans, B and McAdam, D (eds), The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social and Political Movements. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., pp. 1–3.Google Scholar
Tilly, C (1978) From Mobilization to Revolution. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley Press.Google Scholar
White, RW (1989) From peaceful protest to guerrilla war: micromobilization of the Provisional Irish Republican Army. American Journal of Sociology 94, 1277–1302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wong, L, Kellogg, TE and Lai, EY (2021) Hong Kong's National Security Law and the right to a fair trial: a GCAL briefing paper. Georgetown Center for Asian Law, pp. 1–23. Available at https://www.law.georgetown.edu/law-asia/wp-content/uploads/sites/31/2021/06/HongKongNSLRightToFairTrial.pdf (Accessed 18 August 2021).Google Scholar
Zwerman, G, Steinhoff, P and Porta, D (2000) Disappearing social movements: clandestinity in the cycle of new left protest in the U.S., Japan, Germany, and Italy. Mobilization: An International Quarterly 5, 85–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Kobayashi et al. Dataset

Dataset

https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/KJBRQG
Link