John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Independent Scholar, Ithaca, New York, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2022 Jul 27;17(7):e0269976. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0269976. eCollection 2022.
Why have some nonviolent revolutions succeeded even with modest participation numbers, while others have failed despite massive mobilization? We develop an agent-based model that predicts the outcomes of three well-known activism strategies. The first rapidly recruits a wide number of activists, which overwhelms the opponent's support network and encourages large-scale defections. In the second, activists who have already mobilized remain committed to success and inspire other civilians to protest even when they are unable to protest themselves. In the third strategy, campaigns focus their energy and influence directly on the regime's pillars of support. We find that this third strategy outperforms the others in generating defections, even when the size of the campaign is small. When activists have information about pillars' levels of loyalty to the regime, they can target persuasion on the pillars most likely to defect. Importantly, for small or medium-sized movements, the strategy of focusing on pillars-especially the least loyal pillars-is more likely to yield success than relying on rapid mobilization and numerical advantage alone.
为什么有些非暴力革命即使参与人数不多也能成功，而有些革命尽管大规模动员却失败了？我们开发了一个基于代理的模型，该模型预测了三种著名的激进主义策略的结果。第一种策略是迅速招募大量的活动家，这会压倒对手的支持网络，并鼓励大规模的叛逃。第二种策略是已经动员起来的活动家仍然致力于成功，并激励其他平民即使自己无法抗议也参与抗议。第三种策略是，运动将其精力和影响力直接集中在政权的支持支柱上。我们发现，即使运动规模较小，这种第三种策略在产生叛逃方面也优于其他策略。当活动家有关于支柱对政权忠诚度的信息时，他们可以针对最有可能叛逃的支柱进行说服。重要的是，对于小型或中型运动来说，将重点放在支柱上的策略——尤其是最不忠诚的支柱上——比仅仅依靠快速动员和数量优势更有可能取得成功。
