🔎 The Puzzle and Argument

What effect does repression have on opposition to authoritarian rule? Existing studies disagree: some find repression suppresses resistance, while others find it produces backlash and more dissent. An informational theory of repression explains these divergent results by centering censorship as the key moderator.

📚 How Information Shapes Repression’s Effect

The theory predicts that the impact of violent repression depends on the availability of alternative information. Specifically:

• Where alternative media and information channels are present, repression is more likely to increase support for opposition (backlash).
• Where alternative sources of information are limited or censored, repression can reduce support for opposition and even bolster support for incumbents.

📍 Moldova Case: Geocoded Panel Evidence

The theory is tested using an original dataset that combines:

• a panel survey that spans the authoritarian repression of electoral protests in Moldova in 2009, and
• geocoded measures of subnational variation in both repression and the availability of alternative information.

This subnational, panel-based evidence supports the predicted interaction between repression and information access.

🌍 Cross-National Corroboration (2005–16)

The hypothesized interaction is further corroborated in a cross-national analysis covering 2005–2016 that links measures of repression, censorship, and government support, showing the same conditional pattern at broader scales.

🔑 Key Findings

• Censorship conditions whether repression backfires or succeeds.
• In contexts with alternative information, violence tends to increase opposition support.
• In heavily censored contexts, repression often reduces opposition support and can increase incumbent support.
• Results hold in detailed subnational panel data from Moldova (2009 protests) and in a cross-national sample (2005–16).

⚖️ Why It Matters

Identifying censorship as the critical moderator reconciles conflicting empirical claims about repression and dissent. The findings emphasize how information environments shape the political consequences of state violence, with implications for understanding authoritarian durability, protest dynamics, and the effects of media control.