The articles in this issue cover a wide range of topics related to social movements, political resistance, nonviolence, and dissent. These five pieces offer a diverse array of case studies and theoretical reflections, exploring crucial aspects of contentious politics and social protest.

The first article, “Event Coalitions after the Event: Legacies of Mega-Event Activism” by Adam Talbot, introduces a conceptual framework for understanding the lasting impacts of coalition participation on social movement organizations. Drawing from ethnographic research of protests linked to the 2016 Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro, Talbot explores how different organizations benefited from coalition participation. The study highlights that benefits such as organizational changes, enhanced mobilization potential, and political achievements were not evenly distributed. Talbot's article provides valuable insights into the factors influencing the effectiveness of coalition participation, including organizational structure, decision-making processes, and movement mission.

Brian Callan's “WEIRD: Political Feeling and the Emergence of Dissent in Israeli Solidarity Activists” explores the emotional dynamics of Palestinian solidarity activism in Jerusalem. Callan argues that the feeling of “weirdness,” a form of political emotion, emerges when Israeli expectations clash with the realities of military occupation. This subtle but persistent feeling of dissonance fosters doubt about hegemonic Zionism, potentially leading to resistance against oppressive structures. Callan's ethnographic study analyzes how political feelings can shape dissent and activism.

In “Effective Movement Framing Strategies for Gender Policy Changes in South Korea,” Minyoung Moon examines the impact of framing strategies on the outcomes of feminist legislative campaigns. Utilizing qualitative comparative analysis, Moon analyzes the interplay between frame qualities and nonverbal framing activities. The study emphasizes the importance of both articulate and empirically credible frames, as well as strategic silence and broader identity framing. Moon's research illustrates how framing strategies contribute to the success of social movements in achieving policy changes.

Andits Petra's article, “The Issue of Stone-Throwing: The Case of Israeli Anti-Apartheid Activists Not Crossing the Lines,” investigates the ambivalence of Jewish Israeli anti-occupation activists toward stone-throwing during protests. Based on long-term ethnographic fieldwork, Andits explores the confusion and ambiguity that activists feel toward stone-throwing, which are rooted in their complex identities as both Israelis and protesters. The study analyzes how power structures can be both challenged and reinforced in the context of political protest movements.

This issue concludes with a critical exchange section on nonviolence and social protest, featuring reviews of two significant works on the topic of nonviolent resistance. Benjamin S. Case's review of Selina Gallo-Cruz's Have Repertoire, Will Travel: Nonviolence as Global Contentious Performance underscores the global diffusion of nonviolent repertoires and their implications for movement theory and practice. Gallo-Cruz's work challenges the national-bound analysis of movements, advocating for a transnational perspective. Case highlights the critical insights offered by Gallo-Cruz on the standardization and transmission of nonviolent methods and the complex consequences of these processes. The review emphasizes the need for a candid discussion about the uncomfortable aspects of nonviolent resistance and the importance of contextual understanding in movement studies.

Selina Gallo-Cruz's review of Benjamin S. Case's Street Rebellion: Resistance beyond Violence and Nonviolence offers a thorough critique of the dominant narratives in nonviolent resistance scholarship. Case reexamines the NAVCO dataset, questioning the empirical bases of influential studies like Erica Chenoweth and Maria J. Stephan's Why Civil Resistance Works. By exposing inconsistencies and biases in the dataset, Case argues for a more nuanced understanding of the interplay between violence and nonviolence in social movements. Gallo-Cruz's review appreciates Case's methodological rigor and his challenge to the simplistic dichotomies that often characterize the field.

We hope that these articles and reviews will stimulate further research and discussion on social protest, nonviolent resistance, and the multifaceted nature of political dissent.