printRevolutionary Activity in the Digital Age:
Characteristics of Emergence and Development in the Context of Political Regimes (part 2)
Zhdanov A.I.
Junior Research Fellow, HSE University, Moscow, Russia andreizhdanov998@gmail.com
Korotayev A.V.
Ph.D., Dr. Sci. (Hist.), Director, HSE University, Moscow, Russia; Chief Researcher, Institute for African Studies of RAS, Moscow, Russia akorotayev@gmail.com
Zhdanov A.I., Korotayev A.V. Revolutionary Activity in the Digital Age: Characteristics of Emergence and Development in the Context of Political Regimes (part 2). Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. 2026. No 9. P. 3-15
The article examines the impact of digital technologies, above all the Internet and social media, on the likelihood of revolutionary episodes in the twenty-first century. The study addresses a central theoretical controversy in the literature: whether digitalization primarily facilitates protest mobilization or, conversely, strengthens authoritarian control and regime resilience. Using cross-national panel data for the twenty-first century and rare-events logistic regression, the article tests how Internet penetration and Internet freedom affect the onset of revolutionary events under different regime types. The empirical results indicate that Internet penetration is positively associated with the probability of revolutionary outbreaks, but this effect is strongly conditioned by the political regime. The relationship is most pronounced in democracies and hybrid regimes, where digital communication lowers coordination costs, accelerates information diffusion, and facilitates the formation of horizontal protest networks. In autocracies, by contrast, the effect is weaker because states rely on censorship, surveillance, and repression to neutralize online dissent. The study also finds a negative association between Internet freedom and revolutionary probability: restrictions on digital access and online communication increase frustration and can trigger political destabilization. Overall, the findings suggest that digitalization does not cause revolutions on its own, but it amplifies existing grievances and reshapes the dynamics of collective action depending on the institutional environment. The article contributes to the debate on the political consequences of digital communication by showing that the revolutionary potential of the Internet is asymmetrical and regime-dependent.
Голдстоун Дж., Гринин Л.Е., Коротаев А.В. Волны революций XXI столетия // ПОЛИС. Политические исследования. 2022. № 4. С. 108–119. DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2022.04.09; EDN: YWWQFZ. [Goldstone J., Grinin L.E., Korotayev A.V. (2022) Waves of Revolutions in the 21st Century. POLIS. Politicheskie issledovaniya [POLIS. Political Studies]. No. 4: 108–119. (In Russ.)]
Коротаев А.В., Жданов А.И. Количественный анализ политических факторов революционной дестабилизации: опыт систематического обзора // Полития. 2023. № 3(110). С. 149–171. DOI: 10.30570/2078-5089-2023-110-3-149-171; EDN: NAZUCB. [Korotayev A.V., Zhdanov A.I. (2023) Quantitative Analysis of Political Factors of Revolutionary Destabilization: A Systematic Review. Politiya [Politeia]. No. 3(110): 149–171. (In Russ.)]
Ali M.N. (2025) Digital Activism and Collective Mobilization: A Narrative Review of Social Identity, Group Efficacy, and the SIMCA Framework. Sinergi International Journal of Psychology. Vol. 3. No. 1: 38–51. DOI: 10.61194/psychology.v3i1.691.
Arel-Bundock V., Greifer N., Heiss A. (2024) How to Interpret Statistical Models Using Marginaleffects for R and Python. Journal of Statistical Software. Vol. 111. No. 9. DOI: 10.18637/jss.v111.i09.
Beissinger M.R. (2022) The Revolutionary City: Urbanization and the Global Transformation of Rebellion. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Chenoweth E., Wiley-Shay C. (2019) NAVCO 2.1 Dataset. Harvard Dataverse. DOI: 10.7910/DVN/MHOXDV.
Firth D. (1993) Bias Reduction of Maximum Likelihood Estimates. Biometrika. Vol. 80. No. 1: 27–38. DOI: 10.1093/biomet/80.1.27.
Goldstone J.A. (2001) Toward a fourth generation of revolutionary theory. Annual Review of Political Science. Vol. 4. No. 1: 139–187. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.polisci.4.1.139.
Goldstone J.A., Bates R.H. et al. (2010) A Global Model for Forecasting Political Instability. American Journal of Political Science. Vol. 54. No. 1: 190–208. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2009.00426.x.
Handbook of Revolutions in the 21st Century: The New Waves of Revolutions, and the Causes and Effects of Disruptive Political Change. (2022) Ed. by J.A. Goldstone et al. Cham: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-86468-2.
Korotayev A., Grinin L. et al. (2025) The Fifth Generation of Revolution Studies. Part I: When, Why, and How Did It Emerge. Critical Sociology. Vol. 51. No. 2: 257–282. DOI: 10.1177/08969205241300596.
Korotayev A.V., Zhdanov A.I. (2023) Quantitative Analysis of Political Factors of Revolutionary Destabilization: A Systematic Review. Politeia. Vol. 110. No. 3: 149–171. DOI: 10.30570/2078-5089-2023-110-3-149-171.
Korotayev A., Zhdanov A. et al. (2025) Revolution and Democracy in the Twenty-First Century. Cross-Cultural Research. Vol. 59. No. 2: 180–215. DOI: 10.1177/10693971241245862.
Kosmidis I., Firth D. (2021) Jeffreys-prior Penalty, Finiteness and Shrinkage in Binomial-response Generalized Linear Models. Biometrika. Vol. 108. No. 1: 71–82. DOI: 10.1093/biomet/asaa052.Lawson G. (2019) Anatomies of Revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/9781108697385.
Marshall M., Gurr T. (2020) Political Regime Characteristics and Transitions, 1800–2018. Dataset Users’ Manual. Polity5 Project.
Schleffer G., Miller B. (2021) The Political Effects of Social Media Platforms on Different Regime Types. Texas National Security Review. Summer. DOI: 10.26153/TSW/13987.
Ustyuzhanin V., Grinin L. et al. (2024) Revolutions Dataset V1.1. HSE University. URL: https://social.hse.ru/data/2024/10/22/1942459012/CODEBOOK_V1.1.pdf (accessed 12.12.2025).
Weidmann N.B. (2019) The Internet and Political Protest in Autocracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Zhdanov A., Kosolapov K. (2024) Exploring the Polarization of American Elites Based on the Analyses of Candidates’ Statements during the 2020 Presidential Election. Democracy and Security. Vol. 21. No. 2: 93–112. DOI: 10.1080/17419166.2024.2389449.