{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01715686274509804, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003676470588235294, 'mean_word_length': 5.642276422764228, '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}}
The Protest Uses of Symbolic Politics in the USSR

A NUMBER OF INQUIRIES into Political Symbology have emphasized that political regimes frequently manipulate symbols to control the masses.1 In the Symbolic Uses of Politics, Murray Edelman demonstrates persuasively how regimes may utilize symbols to maintain mass quiescence. Regimes are conceived as rational political entrepreneurs who attempt to obtain, augment, and skillfully manage their resources to reduce the costs and increase the benefits resulting from the political game. Among the resources utilized by regimes to prevent the mobilization of challenges to their authority are political symbols ("symbolic reassurances").2 Less often treated, however, is the notion that the masses may often manipulate symbols to control regimes.3 Recent research into