Mobilizing Under Fire: Perceived Threats and Activism Among Progressive NGOs and Advocacy Groups
Start Date
7-8-2026 11:30 AM
End Date
7-8-2026 11:45 AM
Location
ALT 207
Abstract
Threat has long been recognized as an important catalyst for collective action. Changes in political power, economic conditions, and demographic composition have been shown to stimulate reactionary movements, while perceived threats also encourage mobilization among progressive causes, including immigrant rights, environmental activism, and anti-racist organizing.
Yet the literature has paid far less attention to whether sustained exposure to threat can produce enduring increases in organizational activism rather than temporary spikes in participation.
Drawing on interviews with advocacy organizations serving vulnerable populations—including immigrants, racial and ethnic minorities, religious minorities, LGBTQ+ communities, and other marginalized groups—this study examines how organizations respond to prolonged periods of political and social threat. Interviewees described experiencing threats under both previous and current presidential administrations. An interesting finding emerged from the interviews: several organizations described not merely episodic surges in activism, but a sustained increase in contributions to organizational activity that has persisted for years. They emphasized that this level of prolonged mobilization is unprecedented in their organizational histories.
These findings suggest that existing theories may underestimate the long-term organizational consequences of sustained threat. Rather than serving solely as a short-term trigger for collective action, prolonged threats may fundamentally reshape advocacy organizations by creating enduring patterns of mobilization, expanding organizational capacity, and altering expectations regarding future political engagement.
Mobilizing Under Fire: Perceived Threats and Activism Among Progressive NGOs and Advocacy Groups
ALT 207
Threat has long been recognized as an important catalyst for collective action. Changes in political power, economic conditions, and demographic composition have been shown to stimulate reactionary movements, while perceived threats also encourage mobilization among progressive causes, including immigrant rights, environmental activism, and anti-racist organizing.
Yet the literature has paid far less attention to whether sustained exposure to threat can produce enduring increases in organizational activism rather than temporary spikes in participation.
Drawing on interviews with advocacy organizations serving vulnerable populations—including immigrants, racial and ethnic minorities, religious minorities, LGBTQ+ communities, and other marginalized groups—this study examines how organizations respond to prolonged periods of political and social threat. Interviewees described experiencing threats under both previous and current presidential administrations. An interesting finding emerged from the interviews: several organizations described not merely episodic surges in activism, but a sustained increase in contributions to organizational activity that has persisted for years. They emphasized that this level of prolonged mobilization is unprecedented in their organizational histories.
These findings suggest that existing theories may underestimate the long-term organizational consequences of sustained threat. Rather than serving solely as a short-term trigger for collective action, prolonged threats may fundamentally reshape advocacy organizations by creating enduring patterns of mobilization, expanding organizational capacity, and altering expectations regarding future political engagement.
