Elections for the presidency, the Majles, and the city councils perpetuate the politics of hybridity, which in turn has left each of these institutions with conflicting legacies. Hybridity has left them neither democratic nor authoritarian, neither paragons of the people’s political will nor symbols and symptoms of an unresponsive and repressive state. Hybridity perpetuates the politics of ambivalence. It renders presidents and parliamentarians and city councilors ineffective if they cross amorphous, undefined redlines. But it also makes them exciting symbols of the popular will if they speak the people’s language, voice their complaints about prices, and promise to better their lives. Hybridity makes normal a neither-here-nor-there routine of the politics of voting and going along with the system, and, on occasion, breaking into protest out of frustration that rituals like voting matter little. Hybridity and ambivalence go hand in hand, reduce the costs of conformity, increase the price of rebellion, and make possible occasional bouts of protest and violence. Like elections, institutions such as the presidency and the parliament entail risks for the authoritarian core of the state, affording potential wildcards institutional platforms and resources to further their own agendas.

When we turned to Aleppo, we discovered a cityscape that was more complicated than those of Raqqa, Saraqeb, and Darayya. Its battle lines crisscrossed the city, continually shifting during our period of study, making each neighborhood its own unique nucleus in an atomized space. Aleppo is the oldest and second largest Syrian city. Known for its mercantile past and modern industrial present, the city had approximately 3 million residents before the conflict began. The first wave of protests began in 2011, and the city council came into being in March 2013 and was staffed by over 550 personnel by 2016.1

Chapter 2 presents the theoretical contribution of the argument: Successful organizers rely on an understudied and remarkably effective approach – experiential tools – activities designed to attract participants by offering transformative experiences. Often wielded by politically mobilized creatives, experiential tools come in four types – events, social archives, neighbourhood tours, and performances – with the goal of making the protest site the place to be.The chapter sets experiential tools in the context of the literature on social movements. It also discusses the role of networks and prior protest experience in effective mobilization. The chapter moves on to discuss the second outcome of interest: protest impact. It argues that when protestors have allies in city council and competition between local and higher level executives, mobilization has policy impact. The legal system and the variety of capitalismin each country influences the strategies of protest organizers, with important differences between liberal and coordinate market economies.

Chapter 9 focuses on protest impact. It begins by illustrating the role of partisan dealignment, with a discussion of Buenos Aires and Santiago. Cases in these cities followed different paths to mobilization, yet in both sites protest had high impact because organizers found allies at the national level. The chapter then illustrates the pivotal role of the councillor in single-member districts with two divergent cases in Toronto, in Mimico and Parkdale. These cases also illustrate the co-optation of the creative class by real-estate developers – an important lesson because signs indicate that co-optation will become more common. The chapter then examines impact under right-wing partisan alignment, an adverse setting for protesters. In Seoul, the same set of protest strategies led tosuccess in a leftist district (in the Duriban case), yet they failed in a conservative ward (in the Myeong-dong case). The final part of the chapter continues in Seoul, illustrating the change in protest following a shift from development regime to a progressive regime: In Mullae, cultural producers resisted displacement by infiltrating institutions and obtaining support through insider lobbying.