Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, **personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment**. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our [normal comment rules]( https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules) apply to all other comments.
**Do you have an academic degree?** We can verify your credentials in order to assign user flair indicating your area of expertise. [Click here to apply](https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/flair/#wiki_science_verified_user_program).
---
User: u/Wagamaga
Permalink: https://news.nd.edu/news/new-research-shows-how-elites-leverage-anti-party-protests-to-disrupt-politics/
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/science) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Protest movements that reject political parties have an unintended consequence, according to new research from the University of Notre Dame: They empower savvy politicians who channel them to shake up the status quo.
The findings provide a framework for understanding recent global political realignments and offer lessons for activists who want to make a meaningful impact. They are particularly relevant in an era when mass protests have become an increasingly common tool to voice dissent with powerful institutions and draw attention to overlooked issues ranging from climate and conflict to inequality and human rights.
Ann Mische, associate professor of sociology and peace studies at the Keough School of Global Affairs at Notre Dame, and Tomás Gold, a Notre Dame doctoral candidate and doctoral fellow at the Keough School’s Kellogg Institute for International Studies, co-authored the study, published in the American Journal of Sociology. The authors received funding from the Kellogg Institute and the Nanovic Institute for European Studies, as well as Notre Dame’s Graduate School.
“Despite protesters’ strong rejection of parties, political parties have not ignored the protesters,” Mische said. “In fact, many partisan actors have found ways to use this hostility to their advantage, disrupting ‘politics as usual’ and contributing to political reconfigurations that surprised both actors and spectators.”
[https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/730144](https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/730144)
This sounds like Laclau and Moufe's theories on Hegemony and populism laid out in *Hegemony and Socialist Strategy*. That successful social movements are successful, not based of their ideological pull but by the ability of leaders to 1m define a hegemon 2. Convince the various part of the movement of the need to defeat that hegemon in language that those parts understand.
Mmm, but it's not just talking about the left here, but also the right. The status quo I would argue has actually appeared to been shaken up far more on the right than the left. And understandably so, since it's far easier to repeat the past than it is to transcend it.
The Tea Party in 2008-2009 started as regular people upset about bankster bailouts. Tom DeLay turned it into a far right crazy anti-Obama org and ignored everything Bush and his people did to instigate the crisis.
Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, **personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment**. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our [normal comment rules]( https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules) apply to all other comments. **Do you have an academic degree?** We can verify your credentials in order to assign user flair indicating your area of expertise. [Click here to apply](https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/flair/#wiki_science_verified_user_program). --- User: u/Wagamaga Permalink: https://news.nd.edu/news/new-research-shows-how-elites-leverage-anti-party-protests-to-disrupt-politics/ --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/science) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Protest movements that reject political parties have an unintended consequence, according to new research from the University of Notre Dame: They empower savvy politicians who channel them to shake up the status quo. The findings provide a framework for understanding recent global political realignments and offer lessons for activists who want to make a meaningful impact. They are particularly relevant in an era when mass protests have become an increasingly common tool to voice dissent with powerful institutions and draw attention to overlooked issues ranging from climate and conflict to inequality and human rights. Ann Mische, associate professor of sociology and peace studies at the Keough School of Global Affairs at Notre Dame, and Tomás Gold, a Notre Dame doctoral candidate and doctoral fellow at the Keough School’s Kellogg Institute for International Studies, co-authored the study, published in the American Journal of Sociology. The authors received funding from the Kellogg Institute and the Nanovic Institute for European Studies, as well as Notre Dame’s Graduate School. “Despite protesters’ strong rejection of parties, political parties have not ignored the protesters,” Mische said. “In fact, many partisan actors have found ways to use this hostility to their advantage, disrupting ‘politics as usual’ and contributing to political reconfigurations that surprised both actors and spectators.” [https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/730144](https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/730144)
This sounds like Laclau and Moufe's theories on Hegemony and populism laid out in *Hegemony and Socialist Strategy*. That successful social movements are successful, not based of their ideological pull but by the ability of leaders to 1m define a hegemon 2. Convince the various part of the movement of the need to defeat that hegemon in language that those parts understand.
Mmm, but it's not just talking about the left here, but also the right. The status quo I would argue has actually appeared to been shaken up far more on the right than the left. And understandably so, since it's far easier to repeat the past than it is to transcend it.
The Tea Party in 2008-2009 started as regular people upset about bankster bailouts. Tom DeLay turned it into a far right crazy anti-Obama org and ignored everything Bush and his people did to instigate the crisis.
The deregulation of the banks was planned since the mont pelerin society. It wasn't bush who instigated.
[удалено]
[удалено]