This article assesses how contemporary forms of regional assimilation by centralizing states affect the political behavior of threatened social groups within peripheral polities. Recent mainlandization, “the blurring of the physical, social, cultural and psychological border between Mainland China” and Hong Kong, has constrained the region’s autonomy. Here, we consider the political consequences of Chinese mainlandization. How does mainlandization affect the likelihood of political participation in Hong Kong? Drawing and expanding upon theories of social identity, we argue that mainlandization increases the political involvement among those who make the choice to identify as Hong Konger because this is the group under threat by China’s recent actions. Hong Kongers politically mobilize as a response to mainlandization to combat Chinese threat and to improve the status of their identity group, of which their own sense of selves is also tied to. Using an original survey experiment, we find support for our theory. Hong Kongers are influenced by mainlandization to attend contentious protests, recruit others to attend such rallies, and sign pro-democratic petitions. We conclude by noting implications for China’s increasing attempt to assimilate this electoral autocracy and discuss how our research informs Hong Kong political activism in 2019 and 2020.
Why do social movement participants turn to elections to advance their goals? Little scholarship has examined movement–election connections at the micro level, and cases from nondemocratic settings are few. After the 2014 Umbrella Movement in Hong Kong failed to achieve substantive results, very few occupiers ran as candidates in the next two general elections. Drawing on interviews with Umbrella candidates and campaign assistants, I argue that after being politicized by the occupation, those candidates used the authoritarian elections to prolong their challenge. They ran to prove that the occupation, though it had failed, did enjoy popular support, thus turning the elections into electoral “moments”: eruptions of civic energy. Their campaigns were also direct challenges to the existing parties. However, they were constrained by electoral logic. Candidates therefore devised various tactics to justify their decision, and to differentiate themselves from conventional candidates.
Emotions are essential for mobilization. In the face of violent repression, individual participants evaluate their relational positions in the interaction order within relation to other participants and compare their contributions. This evaluation leads to the arousal of emotions that help sustain mobilization. Using Hong Kong’s anti-extradition movement as a case and based on thirty-two in-depth interviews of participants, this article proposes two emotional mechanisms of sustained mobilization. Through the guilt mechanism, interviewees believed that some others were making more contributions, and felt sorry for failing to do more. Interviewees mobilized by the mechanism of moral pleasure and solidarity, on the other hand, argued that participants contributed equally. They took part in the movement out of the desire to fulfill their moral obligations, and they felt good to be part of the movement. The key factor distinguishing the mechanisms was how participants evaluated their positions and contributions compared to other participants.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.