Search
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Mini-Conference
Browse By Division
Browse By Session or Event Type
Browse Sessions by Fields of Interest
Browse Papers by Fields of Interest
Search Tips
Conference
Location
About APSA
Personal Schedule
Change Preferences / Time Zone
Sign In
X (Twitter)
In violent contexts, research suggests that empathy for victims of violence motivates pro-social behaviors like civic engagement, political participation, and helping migrants and refugees. This suggests empathy may be an important source of political mobilization. How do political leaders respond? In what ways do they leverage empathy to influence citizen political engagement around violence?
I investigate this question through one important case of contemporary conflict, Mexico’s “drug war,” and the political strategies of two key actors: the state and human rights advocates. I argue that human rights advocates should attempt to persuade the public by appealing to its sense of empathy. This is so because human rights advocates aim to motivate public engagement around victims’ rights and justice processes and thus benefit from marshaling citizens’ empathy for drug war victims. States, on the other hand, should discourage citizens’ empathy for victims to minimize public complaints and foster support for state security policies. I test this theory through qualitative content analysis of states’ and human rights advocates’ public statements surrounding four cases of organized crime violence in Mexico: (i) the Sabino Gordo massacre; (ii) the Café Iguana shooting; (iii) the disappearance of 43 students in Ayotzinapa; and (iv) the Tlatlaya massacre. I pair this with interviews with state officials, human rights representatives, and media deputies.
Across the cases, I find that the state consistently uses language discouraging empathy with victims. Human rights advocates, meanwhile, use empathy-generating language only intermittently. I then interrogate why advocates leverage empathy in some – but not all - political campaigns. This research advances knowledge about the conditions for broad-based citizen action against violence and about the emotional foundations of political mobilization. While we know much about how political leaders manipulate emotions like anger, fear, and resentment to mobilize followers, the mobilizing power of empathy remains underexplored.