Suppression by Mobilization: How Information Control Strategies Contain Political Criticism in Autocracies

Autocrats selectively tolerate political criticism, which may erode regime support. The literature suggests that regimes contain criticism by encouraging more supportive voices, but the mechanisms remain unclear. We theorize two mechanisms: winning more supporters (persuasion) or mobilizing existing...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inPolitical research quarterly Vol. 77; no. 3; pp. 729 - 742
Main Authors Shao, Li, Liu, Dongshu, Wang, Fangfei
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Los Angeles, CA SAGE Publications 01.09.2024
SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC
Subjects
Autocracy
Criticism
Experiments
Measurement
Mobilization
Nationalism
Persuasion
Propaganda
Respondents
Supporters
political criticism
evidence censorship
mobilization
propaganda
China
authoritarian regimes
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Autocrats selectively tolerate political criticism, which may erode regime support. The literature suggests that regimes contain criticism by encouraging more supportive voices, but the mechanisms remain unclear. We theorize two mechanisms: winning more supporters (persuasion) or mobilizing existing supporters to speak out (mobilization). These mechanisms can be created by censoring evidence that supports criticism and adopting propaganda to arouse nationalism or promise material gains. We conducted two survey experiments in China with a novel measurement of supporter mobilization: respondents’ written defenses against criticism. We find evidence of a mobilization mechanism but not persuasion. Censoring facts strongly encourages supportive comments. Ideological propaganda’s effects are moderate, whereas propaganda on material benefits has no effect.
ISSN:1065-9129
1938-274X
DOI:10.1177/10659129241242040