Institutional power responds to community defiance with retaliation and decisive action.

Evidence

Thus, Buttonwillow residents’ initial experiences in taking some power from the Board were met with serious retribution—by the Board’s physically retaking its space through the intimidating tactic of arresting a speaker (for the crime of requesting Spanish translation; no charges were ever filed) and by its exercise of political power in approving the dump over the opposition of the community. — Luke W. Cole and Sheila R. Foster, From the Ground Up, 440

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Direct collective refusal reveals the contingency of official power. — Luke W. Cole and Sheila R. Foster, From the Ground Up: Environmental…, 435; Collective refusal depends on institutional support that shields participants from penalties — Jenny Odell, How to Do Nothing: Resisting the…, 304; Civil disobedience reveals institutional power as contingent and disruptable (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• Social-movement activity depends on regime-backed rights to endure retaliation #qualifies (0.85) — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 1178
• Collective refusal depends on institutional support that shields participants from penalties #qualifies (0.80) — Jenny Odell, How to Do Nothing, 304
• Civil disobedience reveals institutional power as contingent and disruptable #complicates (0.75)
• Fear of retribution compels even principled resisters into supporting violence #expands (0.72) — Diego Gambetta, Trust - Making and Breaking Cooperative…, 2204