A well-established idea is that the powerless, even when they are angered by the relations of domination or their consequences, do not display this anger for fear of negative sanctions. Although in the first part of his Domination and the Arts of ResistanceJames Scott elaborates this idea in a creative manner, he challenges it in the second part of his book. He proposes that when autonomous spaces emerge in the systems of absolute domination, the powerless use them to develop their (...) own cultures of solidarity and dissent. These make it highly probable that the long-suppressed anger, rather than just simmering, will one day explode in the face of the oppressor with a satisfying full blast. In this article I use mostly Central European material to argue against Scott’s unorthodox view. I line up evidence in support of the thesis that, even where there are autonomous spaces and cultures of dissent, citizens display apathy and protesters start out with much anxiety and caution, afraid to provoke the anger of the powerful. Fear of repression and the wish to dilute one’s own and the onlookers’ anxiety, I argue, account for why, in this region after 1980, protest assumed ever more ambivalent, satirical and carnivalesque forms. Not anger, but rather a mixture of fear and hope – the latter propagated by the leading ÈmigrÈ and domestic dissidents – dictated the display of such emotions as anxiety, but also sorrow or joy. (shrink)