1 – Detecting Science Rhetoric in Political Speeches Using Natural Language Processing
Sukayna Younger-Khanç
University of Konstanz
Abstract: When and how do political leaders use science in their discourse? Existing work has narrowly focused on how democratic leaders talk about polarizing issues, neglecting both non-democracies and other salient topics entirely. Little is still known about how elite language influences public perceptions of the regime, scientists, and science itself, with devastating societal consequences. Employing advanced natural language processing techniques, this work investigates political persuasion through the politicization of science by political leaders. In particular, it investigates whether science rhetoric serves a legitimizing function for autocratic rulers. We devise a comprehensive construct for science rhetoric focusing on three main dimensions: normative, institutional and domains. This project relies on a corpus of political speeches spanning 1980 to 2023 for 100 leaders across 45 countries. Methodologically, it employs an innovative approach for deriving construct representations based on an expert-curated dictionary using open-source large language models. In the first stage, semantic similarities between the concept of science and speeches for each leader are measured to determine why and when they rely on science in their discourse. These scores are extensively validated and evaluated using clustering. In the second stage, open-source models are fine-tuned for sentiment analysis to explore leaders’ views on science in-depth. Performance metrics are additionally reported. Preliminary results indicate that the use of science rhetoric varies considerably across the spectrum of political regimes and over time. Democracy level is inversely correlated with use of science rhetoric, with higher scores in autocracies, supporting our argument.
2 – Can Group Inequalities Explain the Turning Points of State Fragility?
Gulzhan Asylbek kyzy
United Nations University
Abstract: Economic and political inequalities among ethnic groups have been recently shown as important factors that, in many contexts, can contribute to violent conflicts in most parts the world. While the empirical picture is complex, the existing studies rely exclusively on armed conflict as a main outcome of interest. Scholars and policymakers agree, however, that the risks of fragility go beyond outright conflict and violence. Moreover, the studies that are available today are limited in their temporal and geographical coverage. This paper focuses on state fragility and empirically examines the types of horizontal inequalities that are associated with the turning points of entering and exiting from state fragility. We do so by using the Markov chain process in order to estimate the transition probabilities among countries, depending on the level of particular inequalities, for the period of 2005-2020 for over 170 countries. Existing literature on fragility is undermined by the highly aggregate, imprecise measures of the concept. There are no studies to our knowledge that focus on estimating the fragility transition probabilities using the Constellations of State Fragility.
3 – Pathways of Negotiated Radicalization: Evidence From Mass Mobilizations in Hong Kong and Chile
Francisca Castro
ISDC – International Security and Development Center
Abstract: Research on tactical radicalization within nonviolent protests typically centers on how a violent flank instigates violence. However, there has been limited attention on the role of the nonviolent flank and its interactions with their violent counterparts during the radicalization process, particularly in mobilizations without a centralized leadership. Based on a comparative analysis of Hong Kong’s Anti-Extradition Movement and Chile’s Estallido Social, this article argues that nonviolent protesters play a pivotal role in endorsing the use of violent tactics — a dynamic we term negotiated radicalization. We identify two pathways of negotiated radicalization. In Hong Kong, radicalization was incremental in that nonviolent protesters endorsed the use of violent tactics gradually to challenge repression and extract concessions, while simultaneously establishing norms to regulate the application of such tactics. In Chile, radicalization was maximalist in that a violent flank was developed early on in the movement to sideline more violent groups and to forge a safer environment for nonviolent protesters. Our findings offer a more sophisticated understanding of the process of tactical radicalization and the dynamics of protester violence, highlighting the complex interplay between violent and nonviolent strategies.
4 – Claiming rights, obtaining rights? Analyzing a demand-driven approach to international human rights shaming
Christoph Steinert
University of St. Gallen
Abstract: Human rights shaming has often been criticized for being highly politicized. To circumvent politicization, the UN Special Procedures allow individual citizens to bypass state governments and file complaints directly to UN human rights experts. In response to these complaints, UN human rights experts send so-called “communications” to governments responsible for human rights violations, demanding them to remedy these abuses. We know little about the impact of these communications on state repression. We argue that allegations of human rights abuse following individual complaints lead to increasing restrictions on civil society organizations (CSOs) in the targeted states. Strategic and forward-looking governments have incentives to target CSOs that file complaints to deter future complaints. Moreover, shaming based on individual complaints provides governments with detailed information on complainants and their collaborators, by revealing the names of CSOs that supported the complaints with evidence. We argue that governments may exploit this information to engage in targeted repression. We test these arguments across countries and across CSOs within countries. Our evidence based on instrumental variables and dynamic panel models suggests that restrictions on CSOs increase in the wake of communications. Drawing on a large survey with CSO representatives, we also find that the specific CSOs mentioned in communications are subject to targeted repression. Moreover, we find that media-reported events of repression against CSOs increase after these organizations are mentioned in communications. Overall, our study suggests that individual complaints filed to UN Special Procedures can backfire and highlights the importance of protecting the anonymity of complainants.