Print
E-mail 
© Università degli Studi di Padova - Credits: HCE Web agency
Jimena Budar Quesada holds a Bsc degree in Global Management on Social Issues from Tilburg University and a MA degree in Human Rights and Multi-Level Governance from the University of Padova. Living in Mexico City, Jimena now provides support to people in mobility.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
While the act of protesting is nothing new, it is undeniable that these types of social movements have become a frequently used tool to voice concerns to authorities. Protests are used as a means to achieve collective goals, especially when the government is not fulfilling its role according to the community’s wants. Particularly in democratic societies, government officials ought to prioritize the interests of their constituents. Therefore, protests serve as a platform for various groups to remind authorities of their obligations towards the people.
In 2019 alone, anti-regime protests were reported in 114 countries, marking it as ‘the year of protests’. The impact of the 2019 protests was intensified by what the authors call a ‘contagion effect’: as ideas of secession brewed from Barcelona to Hong Kong, and distrust on governments turned into anger from Beirut to Santiago, protesters mimicked techniques and learned from mistakes from movements taking place on other sides of the world. After analyzing the root causes of the 2019 movements, researchers concluded that protests are very likely to continue increasing in the coming years- and indeed they have.
Among the many protests happening in 2019, two really stood out. Whether it was how Hongkongers, knowing they were doomed to fail, stubbornly occupied the city for months; or how Chileans persuaded their government to rewrite the constitution in a matter of weeks, both cases presented an opportunity to evaluate the factors that determine a social movement to succeed.
The case study analysis is based on Charles Tilly's WUNC framework (Worthiness, Unity, Numbers, Commitment), a theory that claims that the strength of a protest relies on the dynamics of these four components. It argues that all four elements must be displayed and must maximize each other (careful not to diminish one another). This framework has remained abstract for the most part, so in order to measure the presence of WUNC components, this theory has been linked to Gene Sharp’s list of Methods of protest action, as seen on Table 1. That is, different protest actions have been linked to a WUNC component.
Table 1. WUNC factors displayed per method of protest action.
The analysis consisted of coding 100 articles from two local newspapers: the South China Morning Post, reporting from Hong Kong, and La Tercera, published in Santiago. The articles were coded by assessing the presence of Sharp’s methods of protest actions in the narration of the events. Each protest method reflected one or more WUNC factors, making it possible to evaluate the degree of presence of each factor per protest movement. The analysis also assessed the influence of contextual factors by coding for possible contextual obstacles or advantages.
On June 16, 2019, 2 million people took to the streets of Hong Kong to protest— more than a quarter of the city’s population. The movement started back in March 2019, when the government announced an extradition bill that would allow citizens from Taiwan and Hong Kong to be extradited to face trial in China. Hongkongers were concerned for the lack of transparency in the extradition and Chinese trial processes, possibly allowing the Chinese government to convict Hongkongers for acts that are only considered illegal in mainland China. The movements (and the government repression) grew to a high point in June when police openly used coercive force to stop protests. Enraged by the government’s response, on June 16th people took over the main roads of the city voicing five demands, including the withdrawal of the bill, the due process against police brutality, and universal suffrage for the authorities of the city.
The movement took different shapes: from peaceful marches and vigils to university occupations and economic boycotts. Protesters faced strong police repression and severe legal consequences for engaging. Protests continued until the beginning of 2020, when the pandemic forced people to stay at home. Indeed, the strength and commitment shown by Hongkongers in 2019 is one to be remembered. Why, then, were their demands ignored? Was the COVID outburst really what stopped them, or could they have done things differently? The analysis conducted intended to answer these questions.
The first thing to pop up in the study was the high displays of Unity and Commitment. Hong Kongese protesters stood out for their organization, for their high use of symbols to bring each other together, and for the great risks they took in exposing themselves to police repression. However, another aspect to point out is the big presence of acts of commitment tied to unworthy behavior. Two outstanding acts of commitment were occupation and economic boycott. While they definitely brought attention to the cause (internationally even), these acts were not well received by bystanders and even by a portion of protesters, either because they were deemed violent or because they significantly hurt the local economy. Combined with lack of political opportunity and robust protest crackdown, committed, yet unworthy, acts of protest discouraged many to take part, and pushed others to speak out against the movement. And so, answering the previous questions, the pandemic did bring the movement to a full stop, but it cannot be denied that the strength of the movement was already in a steady decline. That is, such acts of bravery came at the expense of the movement’s legitimacy. Having said that, it is hard to imagine that a peaceful, quiet movement would have shaken the city as much as this pro-democracy wave did.
In October 2019, the Chilean society erupted- or so the title ‘Estallido social’ suggests. The 30CLP (0.4$) increase in the price of metro tickets was not well received, and students organized themselves to oppose it. Police tried to quickly crush the movement by using force, a strategy that backfired. People from all sectors of society took to the streets not only to show solidarity towards the student protesters, but to seize the opportunity and remind the government of all kinds of unaddressed injustices. Indeed, the movement was a social outburst in which people – students, workers, the elderly, indigenous groups – were too fed up with the government to take it. What started as an economic boycott against the public transport system, turned into weeks of demonstrations and barricaded assemblies. Each protester demanded a different claim, yet they all agreed that it was high time for the government to listen to its constituents.
Along with peaceful protesters came radical strategies to barricade the city center. Still ignoring the people’s demands, the president declared a state of emergency and sent the military to the streets. Such acts echoed the country's dictatorial past which was taken personally by many citizens. Assemblies, marches, and virtual discussions grew in number and the call for a dignified livelihood reached all sides of the Chilean population.
Aware that they were losing support, parties from the whole political spectrum came together to propose a new constitution, one that did not perpetuate inequality. To this day, the new constitution is still being revised and re-edited at congress, and so only time will tell if it will serve to alleviate inequalities. Even though the long-term outcomes of this movement are yet to be seen, the impact and reach of the Estallido Social cannot be denied. So, how is it that this movement managed to push for a revision of the constitution? How did it differ from the Hong Kongese efforts (even when reports show they copied Hongkongers’ tactics)?
The first thing to note is that Worthiness played a bigger role in this movement. Mostly through artistic media (murals, music, books), Chileans expressed their grievances, legitimizing their claims. However, there were also significant displays of unworthy, committed behavior, such as looting and arson. Yet, unworthiness did not affect the movement the way it did in Hong Kong. A possible explanation is that the most severe acts of looting were blamed on a criminal, radical minority that took advantage of the chaos. Thus, the mainstream movement managed to be untainted by such actions.
A second important finding is the unlikely unity displayed. As mentioned before, protesters showed up with different claims, some demanding access to education, fair pensions, or more representation for minorities. How to unite such scattered demands? Chileans empathized with each other’s grievances and realized they all stemmed from an unwillingness to change a status quo which benefited only a few. Within this framework of fighting inequality and demanding dignity, different sectors of the population united. Unity, tied with a diversified quorum, gave significant strength to the movement, making the claims impossible to ignore. The authorities in power had no choice but to recognize the democratic power held by the people. Thus, a new constitution was envisaged as an umbrella solution to address the many grievances.
It can be concluded that WUNC factors do determine to some extent the level of success of a movement. Confirming Tilly’s and Wouter & Walgrave’s understanding of the workings of WUNCness, a strong, yet balanced, display of WUNC components can give a protest the cutting edge to persuade their opponents- as seen in the case of Chile. On the other hand, if one element is lacking or overshadowed by other actions, the protest’s strength might be nullified, getting nowhere. It happened as such in Hong Kong, where committed actions were deemed unworthy.
However, the analysis also found that contextual factors, such as the level of political opportunity, also delimit the extent to which a protest can achieve its goals. That is, if the opponents do not perceive any value in attending to the protesters’ demands and/or the losses they would suffer from agreeing to the concessions are too great, it is unlikely that they will open the door for negotiations. Hong Kongese officials' ties to mainland China proved stronger than to the voices of their citizens. On the other hand, Chilean authorities had lost most legitimacy the moment they sent the military out. A compromise had to be met if they were to regain their legitimacy. In conclusion, both agency and context determine the success of a movement.
Hong Kong’s and Chile’s examples of WUNC displays demonstrate that how protesters choose to behave ultimately affects the impact of the social movement. A significant implication of this result is that the effects of the protests on all stakeholders should be taken into account. That is, it is not just about how WUNC is perceived by the opponent, but also by bystanders and the general audience. Protesters must take into account how others are affected by their actions for two reasons: to not alienate them and eventually turn them against them, and to ideally persuade them into supporting the movement as well.
Finally, another important implication drawn from this finding is that for protests to be successful, WUNC factors should be properly portrayed and applied. The matrix presented above, linking Sharp’s list of methods of protest action with WUNC factors, gives a good overview of what actions to take in order to evenly display WUNCness in a movement. Indeed, to understand the success of a protest, one must not only look at its numbers, but at what they do with these numbers. These 2019 protests stood out not just for their historical size, but for the worthiness, unity, and commitment they displayed.
21/3/2024
