Legitimising Repression Through Emotions: Autocratic Protest Discourse in Kazakhstan and Tunisia

This paper explores how authoritarian regimes mobilise emotional appeals as discursive tools to legitimise power and suppress dissent, focusing on the Kazakhstani and Tunisian regimes’ violent response to mass protests. It examines the rhetorical strategies employed by President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev and President Ben Ali during two key moments of political unrest: the Arab Uprisings of 2010-2011 and the January 2022 protests. Through critical discourse analysis of public speeches, official statements, and state media coverage, the article traces how elites in two regimes framed protests as existential threats to national stability, sovereignty, and social order. By examining the articulation of fear, sadness, and hope, the study investigates how emotional narratives function as mechanisms of authoritarian legitimation. Through a comparative analysis of the two regimes’ communicative strategies during repressive episodes, the paper highlights that emotional narratives do not simply reflect regime reactions but actively shape political realities by producing affective meanings. The comparison between Kazakhstan and Tunisia reveals how emotions are mobilised across different authoritarian contexts, shaped by historical legacies, media environments, and leadership styles. The fear-based discourse functioned not only to delegitimize opposition but also to reassert the state’s moral authority and paternalistic role as a guarantor of peace and security. Discourses of fear and sadness are not merely reactive but are part of a broader affective strategy of authoritarian legitimation closely interlinked with state repression. By embedding hope in post-protest narratives, politicians fostered public acquiescence and resilience against future dissent. This approach aims to uncover the affective patterns through which autocrats manage dissent, stabilise their rule, and shape public perceptions of crisis and political order. By foregrounding emotion as a key analytical lens, the study demonstrates how affective governance contributes to the endurance of authoritarian rule while simultaneously revealing its vulnerabilities during mass mobilisation. Understanding affective aspects of protest discourses provides deeper insight into how autocratic legitimacy is constructed, sustained, and challenged during repressive episodes. This research contributes to the growing scholarship on affective governance, authoritarian resilience, political violence, and the role of emotion in contemporary political regimes.