Navalny’s Gamesters: Protest, Opposition Innovation, and Authoritarian Stability in Russia
In: Russian PoliticsSearch for other papers by Regina Smyth in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Irina V. Soboleva in
Current site
Google Scholar
This paper explores the legacy of the For Fair Elections (ffe) protest movement in 2011–2012 for electoral competition in Russia. We argue that through strategic innovation, oppositions in authoritarian countries can challenge the autocratic state on multiple fronts by transferring resources from street protests to the electoral arena. Our empirical focus is on Alexei Navalny’s campaign for Moscow mayor in late summer 2013. The successful mass mobilization in the movement enabled the campaign to implement a model of electoral innovation based on ideational frames, resources, and tactics drawn from the protest movement. Voter response was stronger than expected, demonstrating the persistence of voter opposition in the face of genuine electoral choice. Relying on press reports, blogs, campaign materials and interviews with activists, we investigate the campaign’s strategy and show why it presented a particular challenge to the regime. Our conclusion underscores the state’s advantage in countering elite opposition innovation, but also highlights how effective opposition innovation can lead to significant changes in strategies to maintain regime stability.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
-
3
Vladimir Kara-Murza, “Politics in Russia: the Kremlin’s troubles”, World Affairs 176, no. 5 (2014): 47–55.
-
15
Kenneth Greene, “Opposition Party Strategy and Spatial Competition in Dominant Party Re-gimes. A Theory and the Case of Mexico,” Comparative Political Studies 35, no. 7 (2002): 755–783.
-
19
Jonathan Fox, “The Difficult Transition from Clientelism to Citizenship: Lessons from Mexico,” World Politics 46, no. 02 (1994): 151–184.
-
20
Kenneth Greene, “Opposition Party Strategy and Spatial Competition in Dominant Party Regimes. A Theory and the Case of Mexico,” Comparative Political Studies 35, no. 7 (2002): 755–783.
-
21
Regina Smyth and Sarah Oates, “Mind the Gaps: Media Use and Mass Action in Russia,” Europe-Asia Studies 67, no.2 (2015):285–305, doi:10.1080/09668136.2014.1002682.
-
28
Marlene Laruelle, “Alexei Navalny and Challenges in Reconciling ‘Nationalism’ and ‘Liberalism’,” Post-Soviet Affairs 30, no. 4 (2014): 1–22; Natalia Moen-Larsen, “Normal Nationalism”: Alexei Navalny, “LiveJournal and ‘the Other’,”East European Politics 30, no. 4 (2014): 548–567.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 2625 | 612 | 52 |
| Full Text Views | 386 | 36 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 377 | 78 | 4 |
Navalny’s Gamesters: Protest, Opposition Innovation, and Authoritarian Stability in Russia
In: Russian PoliticsSearch for other papers by Regina Smyth in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Irina V. Soboleva in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
This paper explores the legacy of the For Fair Elections (ffe) protest movement in 2011–2012 for electoral competition in Russia. We argue that through strategic innovation, oppositions in authoritarian countries can challenge the autocratic state on multiple fronts by transferring resources from street protests to the electoral arena. Our empirical focus is on Alexei Navalny’s campaign for Moscow mayor in late summer 2013. The successful mass mobilization in the movement enabled the campaign to implement a model of electoral innovation based on ideational frames, resources, and tactics drawn from the protest movement. Voter response was stronger than expected, demonstrating the persistence of voter opposition in the face of genuine electoral choice. Relying on press reports, blogs, campaign materials and interviews with activists, we investigate the campaign’s strategy and show why it presented a particular challenge to the regime. Our conclusion underscores the state’s advantage in countering elite opposition innovation, but also highlights how effective opposition innovation can lead to significant changes in strategies to maintain regime stability.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 2625 | 612 | 52 |
| Full Text Views | 386 | 36 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 377 | 78 | 4 |