The aim of this paper is to understand how self-limitation works in contemporary Moroccan mobilizations and what this case study can bring to broader social movements’ knowledge. When it comes to study social movements self-limitation, social movements analysis, be it the resources mobilization theory or its more recent and sophisticated form the “political process” model, provides limited help. Since its elaboration during the 70s, the main object of the field was the disruptive dimension of large numbers protracted mobilizations. Most of the literature deals with contentious politics, the civil rights movement, antiwar and anti-nuclear movements, LGBT pride movements, environmental protests whose magnitude, claims and political agendas, repertoires and numbers of activist groups where disrupting public order. In that perspective, MENA is no exception since most of the literature deals with Islamism. Moroccan mobilizations, particularly the February 20 Movement, can provide some clues in order to understand how and for what reasons activists carefully self-limit their mobilizations. In 2011, despite their spread in various part of the territory, contestation dynamics did not reach national amplitude, by spin-off processes from one site to another. I will look institutionalization processes of the Moroccan protest space and protesters and security forces learning effects. Both were the reason for extremely cautious behaviors in an effort to avoid escalation. I will also address how actors of the Moroccan contentious space calculate their moves and will explain why self-limitation is not linked to any local moral economy. In other words, regardless of the radical posture claimed by members of the Movement - or coined by their critics in an attempt to delegitimize them - the issue of mobilizations and public controversies was nothing more than the reform of the monarchy. Finally, the paper will describe the relation between the contentious space and institutional politics. Political parties and unions offered only limited support to mobilization, when they did not oppose it: the 2011 demonstrations were an accurate indicator of the depoliticization of institutional politics.