{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018970189701897018, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008130081300813009, 'mean_word_length': 5.7560975609756095, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A Social Movement Society?: A Cross-National Analysis of Protest Potential

Some argue that we are experiencing a global shift toward a "social movement society" in which protest is a routine part of political bargaining. Postindustrialism and affluence are seen as combining with the growth of the state and neocorporatist bargaining in creating greater protest potential. We use a multilevel analysis of 41,235 respondents nested within thirty-five countries from the 1990 World Values Survey to examine this question. Net of standard controls for individual-level sources of protest potential, we find that economic affluence, state capacity, women as a percentage of the total labor force, and left corporatism contribute to greater aggregate protest potential. Ethnic grievances stemming from economic discrimination and percentage of Protestants also contribute positively while language dominance suppresses protest potential. Protest potential is an outgrowth of postindustrialism trends, the prevailing control strategy of left parties in neocorporatist states, and long-standing ethnic grievances.