Revolutions Against the State

Beck, Colin J.

doi:10.31235/osf.io/7j5ha

Cited by 3 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 70 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…But, in fact, there are. We do not seek to repeat a catalog of findings here as we have already done so elsewhere (see Beck 2017Beck , 2020Goldstone and Ritter 2018). Rather, we suggest here that the central questions of the field that animated 20 th century debate-what to study, how to study it, and how to theorize-mostly have been settled.…”

Section: Hidden Knowledge Accumulationmentioning

confidence: 88%

Thinking Beyond Generations: On the Future of Revolution Theory

Beck¹,

Ritter²

2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A recent exchange between Allinson (2019) and Abrams (2019) on the current state of revolution theory rests on the assumption that the generational, backward-looking view of revolution studies is also a fruitful way of thinking of the field’s present and future. We argue, in contrast, that while a generational approach has important benefits, it also contains shortcomings that may lead the future of revolution studies in less fruitful directions. We examine where an overreliance on generational thinking has led us, and provide an exploratory sketch of how we can begin to move beyond generational thinking and imagine a new future for the study of revolution.

show abstract

Section: Hidden Knowledge Accumulationmentioning

confidence: 88%

Thinking Beyond Generations: On the Future of Revolution Theory

Beck¹,

Ritter²

2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One obvious problem with these accounts is that generational thinking has obscured the long-standing roots of different approaches and the remarkable re-occurrence of theoretical imagery across different scholarly eras (Beck, 2020). We highlight a few examples.…”

Section: The Limits Of Generational Thinkingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…But, in fact, there are. We do not seek to repeat a catalog of findings here as we have already done so elsewhere (see Beck, 2017Beck, , 2020Goldstone & Ritter, 2018). Rather, we suggest here that the central questions of the field that animated 20 th century debate-what to study, how to study it, and how to theorize-mostly have been settled.…”

Section: Hidden Knowledge Accumulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We argue that a persistent focus on generations is misguided as debates in revolution research actually occur laterally among contemporaneous studies of revolution, rather than sequentially between reified paradigms. This is partially a consequence of mistaking touchstone texts for generations of scholarship (see for instance Ritter's (2015: 9-12) review of the literature, which Beck (2020) has thoroughly dismissed). As such, we have lost sight of our accumulated knowledge over the last one hundred years.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is partially a consequence of mistaking touchstone texts for generations of scholarship (see for instance *Colin J. Beck is Associate Professor of Sociology at Pomona College; Daniel P. Ritter is Associate Professor of Sociology at Stockholm University. Ritter's [2015: 9-12] review of the literature, which Beck [2020] has thoroughly dismissed). As such, we have lost sight of our accumulated knowledge over the last one hundred years.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Thinking Beyond Generations: On the Future of Revolution Theory

Beck¹,

Ritter²

2021

J Historical Sociology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A recent exchange between Allinson (2019) and Abrams (2019) on the current state of revolution theory rests on the assumption that the generational, backward-looking view of revolution studies is also a fruitful way of thinking of the field's present and future. We argue, in contrast, that while a generational approach has important benefits, it also contains shortcomings that may lead the future of revolution studies in less fruitful directions. We examine where an overreliance on generational thinking has led us, and provide an exploratory sketch of how we can begin to move beyond generational thinking and imagine a new future for the study of revolution.

show abstract

Structure, Temporality, and Theories of Revolution. Reading Alberto Melucci in Revolutionary Saint Domingue, 1791–1804

Wilén

2021

J Historical Sociology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article addresses the debate on structure, agency, and process in contemporary revolution theory, drawing on social movement theory and using the Haitian Revolution as an illustrative case.The article seeks to make three main contributions. Firstly, while accepting the critique against the failure of structuralist revolution theory to explain why revolutions can occur under difficult circumstances, the article proposes a structuralist solution instead of the focus on intentions and processes in contemporary revolution theory. Secondly, it brings a new angle to the emerging dialogue between the different fields that theorize social movements and revolutions, by combining Alberto Melucci's early and later approaches to social movements and temporality. Thirdly, the Meluccian approach is utilized in a case study that explores how independence from France can be understood in the Haitian Revolution, which serves to illustrate the strengths of the theoretical approach and to criticize the major accounts of independence in existing studies of the Haitian Revolution.

show abstract

Revolutions Against the State

Cited by 3 publications

References 70 publications

Thinking Beyond Generations: On the Future of Revolution Theory

Thinking Beyond Generations: On the Future of Revolution Theory

Thinking Beyond Generations: On the Future of Revolution Theory

Structure, Temporality, and Theories of Revolution. Reading Alberto Melucci in Revolutionary Saint Domingue, 1791–1804

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About