The 3.5 percent rule says that if a peaceful protest movement reaches 3.5 percent of a country's population, then an authoritarian government is likely to collapse.
The concept is increasingly being invoked by those who regularly demonstrate against US President Donald Trump , with the hope that they will reach that threshold as the protest movement grows.
"We're trying to reach 3.5 percent" is a common refrain among protest organisers in the US prior to a major anti-Trump demonstration, and some protest groups note the rule on their websites. What is the basis of the rule? "The 3.5 percent rule" was advanced by Erica Chenoweth in 2013 based on research with Maria Stephan, both professors who specialise in nonviolent resistance movements.
Their 2011 book "Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict" focuses on movements between 2000 and 2006, looking at more than 300 protest campaigns. Their research builds on work by political science professor Mark Lichbach who wrote "The Rebel's Dilemma: Economics, Cognition, and Society” who coined a similar 5 percent rule.
Chenoweth based her 3.5 rule on her own research data.
Nonviolence is key to this formula because research shows its inclusivity attracts far more people—around four times as many—than violent movements.
According to findings by Chenoweth and Stephan, only 26 percent of violent protest movements were successful, whereas 53 percent were found to have been successful.
Chenoweth has found that nonviolent movements, due to their social appeal, can lead to defections within a system, a wider spectrum of participation, and were more likely to create democratic breakthroughs.
"We want to see mothers, babies and grandmothers there. We want it to be a place for the whole family," Liliana Soroceanu, a San Francisco-based volunteer with the nationwide protest group Indivisible, told The New Arab prior to Saturday's "No Kings" demonstration , showing the importance of inclusivity to the movement. The case of the US For the US to achieve the 3.5 percent rule, with a population of around 380 million, a demonstration would have to reach around 12 million. So far, the largest anti-Trump demonstration, which took place on Saturday, was estimated at 8 million, up by about one to two million from the two previous "No Kings" demonstrations.
It is difficult to compare the US with other countries given its size and executive power.
Nevertheless, history points to examples of internal defections if there is a broad enough social movement to support change.
There have been some examples of protests affecting implementation of federal policy. This includes local demonstrations pushing immigration agents out of areas where they would conduct raids.
There have been some indications that demonstrations could be having an indirect effect on the administration. The departures of the widely mocked Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and her advisor Corey Lewandowski from their posts and the appointment of MarkWayne Mullin, who has said he would work within the law in immigration enforcement, possibly shows that the administration is listening to public complaints.
The recent resignation of Joe Kent as Trump's counterterrorism chief over his opposition to Trump's claims of Iran posing a threat to the US could show that he saw public support for such a move.
More broadly, 36 Republicans have announced their retirement from Congress at the end of this term (more than twice the number of Democrats), possibly showing that they don't see their movement as viable.
It is unclear if demonstrators in the US will reach "the 3.5 percent" threshold.
What is clear, however, is that the movement against Trump is growing.