Legitimising state-driven violence: strategies, adaption and resonance

Mass protests and repression are both dominant in current times. Most recent are the protests in Iran, Kazakhstan, Brazil, Peru, and China, but also, the previous years, masses took the streets around the globe. At the same time, the annual reports of human rights and democracy watchdog organizations highlight numerous events of repression and shrinking civic spaces (which are strongly correlated with processes of democratic erosion) over recent years (e.g., HRW 2022, CIVICUS 2022, IDEA 2022). Such acts must be politically communicated to maintain legitimacy in countries with an active civil society and/or international dependencies. Otherwise, repression might backfire and shutter the grip on power. Existing research on the legitimisation of repression often lacks theoretical foundations beyond authoritarianism research. We know little about the strategies used to legitimise (disproportionate) repression and less about how these are adjusted towards different interlocutors and which factors are important for legitimisation discourses to resonate with the respective audiences. Based on an inductive case study on repression in Nicaragua, I developed a theoretical and analytical framework for the study of the legitimisation of repression, combining insights from repression and authoritarianism research with knowledge from linguistics, securitisation, framing, and discourse analysis. I find normalisation, legalisation, rationalism, identity, and emotions to be essential factors in legalisation discourses and their reception. I further argue that these factors are carefully adjusted to the targeted audiences in resonating discourses.