I examined whether expressing minority opinions enhances self-concept clarity and whether need for uniqueness (NfU) moderates this predicted relationship. I used an experimental survey with a 2 (Pre-existing Position: opposed, in favor) × 2 (Majority Position: opposed, in favor) × 2 (Participant Action: resist, conform) design. Participants identified themselves as primarily for or against granting legal rights to homosexuals and completed an NfU measure. Participants were then randomly assigned to read that the majority of MSU students either oppose or support granting legal rights to homosexuals. After reading arguments consistent with the majority position, participants were asked to offer arguments that either supported or refuted the majority. Contrary to hypotheses, arguing the minority position did not enhance self-concept clarity. Anti-gay rights participants were higher in self-concept clarity than pro-gay rights participants, and they became even higher in self-concept clarity when arguing with an opposed majority than when arguing against one.

EU’s international role as a normative power can be questioned as the current foreign policy of the Eastern Partnership implies a limit to the union’s ability to democratize. An alignment with EU norms is often seen through a dichotomy of compliance or non-compliance, overlooking other forms of resistance stemming from a nexus of international compliance pressure, and defiance pressure from hybrid regime structures. This applies to Georgia, a pro-EU country in the Eastern Partnership, committed to EU norms while maintaining a skewed playing field in favor of incumbents. Through the application of a theoretical framework developed in memory studies, a range of rhetorical adaptation strategies employed by the ruling party regarding electoral reforms delineates a norm navigation. A qualitative content analysis of statements and events relating to the long-contested electoral system during 2015-2019 shows a variation of strategies used, pointing in a direction of increased pressure to align with prescribed EU norms. Whether EU or domestic political forces can be credited is difficult to determine, yet the nuances of norm resistance are important to analytically separate from overarching labels, as states’ rhetorical commitments need a critical perspective to better understand the limits to EU’s normative power in the Eastern Partnership.

Since 2014, the international community has been discussing how to deal with the emergence of increasingly autonomous weapons systems under the auspices of the United Nations Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. This case study examines the behavior of those nation-states that oppose a preventive ban on lethal autonomous weapons systems in this forum. In this regard, the concept of antipreneurship is applied to the analysis of the international meetings in order to explore the resistance patterns with which antipreneurs reject the need for normative change. Analyzing the content of related documents shows that antipreneurs block formal negotiations on a ban and deem legal weapons reviews to be a sufficient regulatory instrument. Beyond that, the antipreneurs also attempt to create a beneficial image of the relationship between artificial intelligence and international humanitarian law. This behavior contributes to force norm entrepreneurs increasingly into a defensive position and sustainably undermines their entrepreneurial demand for a preventive ban. Besides, the analysis distinguishes the resistance of antipreneurs from ambivalent behavior that cannot be clearly linked neither to the behavior of entrepreneurs nor to that of antipreneurs.