Rebellion, Violence and Revolution: A Rational Choice Perspective

This content is available through online browsing (free) program dependent on page scan. Screen readers can not currently scan, so please contact JSTOR user support for access. We will provide PDF copy of your screen reader

There are many revolts, successful revolts are few, there is little social revolution. First, we examine the relative frequency of the elite and mass rebellion. Since the rational choice method seems to be easy to explain the elite rebellion and the deprivation law seems to be suitable for the interpretation of a large scale rebellion, the relative frequency of these two revolutions contributes to rational choice. Second, a small group rebellion is related to military problems such as loyalty and failure of war. Military defeat in war is not necessary or sufficient for the success of the rebellion, but may still enhance that possibility. Third, some people believe that the linkage between international competition and the revolution promoted by the ruler's setbacks and revolutions is consistent with a reasonable choice.

The following theory is broadly based on interpretation of Marxism of rebellion. They explore the reason for the rebellion from various perspectives. In the words of Theda Skocpol, the rebellion is being studied by analyzing objective relationships and conflicts between different groups and countries, not the interests, perspectives, or ideology of a particular stakeholder in the revolution. Ted Gour considers the roots of political violence itself applied to the framework of rebellion in his book "Why are the people rebellious"? He defines political violence as follows. "All collective attacks against political groups, their subjects, or policies within the political group, this concept represents a series of events whose common nature is the actual or threat of violence." Gurr is angry with violence I saw a voice. And it shows that he violated the established order.

Political violence, especially rebellion, is characterized by complete collapse of authority and disorder. This is inspired by Thomas Hobbes' view. In this approach, we believe that the rebellion is motivation for greed and plunder. We use violence to break the power structure of society. The essential motivation for all political violence arises from a collection of abstract loyalty and beliefs. "Only by former collective and non-personal hostility, political enemies can become private enemies." Therefore, violence is not a problem between "people and people", but the state "conflicts" the idea and the idea of ​​"not a fight".