Short Abstract:

Why do so many social movements, start forcefully but buckle as the weeks wear on? A viable protest cannot just be obstructive. It needs to bring together, those who want to see the change with those who have the capacity to effect change. In other words, incentives need to be aligned.

Long Abstract:

Some of the most lustily fought social movements have been to protest against corruption in government and political establishments. Yet huge shows of strength on the streets and frenetic mobilizations online have not translated into actual displacement of the politically powerful and corrupt. Sometimes such movements have even been co-opted by the establishment.

A key reason for this in developing countries is that those protesting for enforcement of an impartial rule of law are doing so in contexts where instead of a rule of law a rule by law prevails - that is, where enforcement is selective. Hence, the pressure tactics of protest movements have limited impact.

For collective action to be effective and sustainable, coalitions have to be first identified in a manner that aligns both those who want the change with those who have the ability to effect it. This does not mean working with the established powerful. On the contrary, it means strategically identifying those who are potentially powerful and would gain from the change. It also requires organizing the coalition in a manner where members are able to hold out against the politically powerful for a period of time. These conditions are not easy to come by, but incremental change achieved in this manner can develop into a virtuous cycle of change as more pockets of society start becoming rule following, thus the anti-corruption agenda is more likely to be achieved as more and more people abide by rule of law.