The dilemma of violence

Abstract

If nonviolent methods of resistance are effectiveand perhaps even more successful than violent methodswhy do opposition movements ever resort to violence? The literature on social movement and nonviolent resistance implies that expansion in an opposition movement's size decreases the risk of violent dissent since successful recruitments improve the movement's relative power and reduce the necessity of using violence to pressure the state. Nevertheless, a sudden and large expansion in movement size can overburden its organizational capacities and thus increase the risk of violent dissent. Therefore, this study contends while a gradual expansion in the size of the movement decreases the likelihood of violent dissent, a sudden and large expansion in its size raises the risk of violence. These theoretical arguments are evaluated empirically using Nonviolent and Violent Campaigns and Outcomes 2.1 and Mass Demonstrations and Mass Violent Events in the Former USSR datasets. The analysis of these datasets across several regression models supports the developed theoretical arguments.