Article on Collective Action- Egypt

I found an interesting article that relates heavily with the lectures this week. The article is called ‘Mobilization structures and political change in an authoritarian context: the national association for change as a case study’ by S Magued. The article talks about the case in Egypt where Egyptian diplomat Mohamed ElBaradei incited a revolt in Egypt because of the injustices related to the death of Khalid Saeed. This article talks about how the political opportunity structure worked in relation to the Egypt revolt on the Mubarak regime. Furthermore, the article discusses what leads to protest and social movements in authoritarian regimes by highlighting the mobilisation theory in relation to the Egypt revolt.

One of the important differentiations this article make is the difference between movements made in democratic and non-democratic regimes. This is because democratic regimes highlighted by McCarthy and Zald dictate that ‘affluence and prosperity in a democratic context empower social movements’ activities through resources provision, like the means of communication, money, and intellectual classes.’ (38) Therefore, protests are easier in democratic regimes because citizens are freer and have the resources and environment to mobilise. While, in authoritarian regimes the article highlights the importance of ‘transformative events.’ These events occur when there is wide repression by authorities on civilians and a moral shock among the audience that perceives and communicates how repression is illegitimate and unjust. (39) Transformative events are important because ‘provide the opportunity to intensify and strengthen the movements’ activity and organisational groundwork’ and increase mobilisation. (39) This relates to lecture material this week as it illustrates the importance of injustices in inciting mobilisation rather than economic means.

The main argument the article makes is ‘Khalid Said’s death enabled the NAC to combine the three features of collective action in an authoritarian context, i.e. political opportunity, shared common grievance, and collective mobilisation. (40) The political opportunity was created based on Saeed’s death that created discontent and highlighted the injustices of the police, human rights and failed reforms. ‘In other words, by calling for the end of systematic torture in police stations and asking for officers’ accountability as an inevitable step towards change, the NAC benefited from the existing opportunity and attracted more supporters.’ (43) Moreover, many social movements existed before the Saeed incident, notably the 6 April and Kefaya, that also condemned Khalid Said’s death and supported the NAC’s advocacy for a political change. Therefore, there was a shared common grievance that have been protesting before the Saeed incident. ElBaradei incited a revolt by rallying political activists and movements under his auspices through regular meetings, protests, marches and political campaigns. This was done to create for free and fair elections, a new liberal constitution, and in order to achieve guaranteed citizens’ freedom and rights. Having the support of 120 leading opposition figures, the NAC goal was to end Mubarak authoritarianism and to lead a change in order to improve Egypt’s political conditions.

The article also highlights Stekelenburg and Klandermans (2013) argument that collective emotions of shared grievance by considering protests as the manifestation of individual grievance that builds up into a collective issue.