Anatomies of Revolution

Extract

The so-called “fourth generation” of revolution studies has always lacked a central text. The first generation natural history of revolution had Crane Brinton’s Anatomy of Revolution, second generation strain theories had Ted Robert Gurr’s Why Men Rebel, and third generation structuralism had Theda Skocpol’s States and Social Revolutions. What these texts share is compelling theoretical imagery—that revolutions unfold in stages, are the products of grievances brought about by modernization, or the result of the breakdown of the administrative state—combined with an archetypal method of analysis—processual events, rational choice modeling, or macro-causal comparison of cases. The field has gotten messier since the 1990s. Fourth generation approaches encompass a dizzying array of new causal factors and a multiplicity of analytical strategies. It is thus little wonder that there has been lack of coherence in recent revolution studies and no core work to point to as capturing its spirit. So, the question emerges: Is George Lawson’s Anatomies of Revolution the book we have been waiting for? In my estimation, yes. The book will likely stand as the ideal-typical example of fourth generation revolution studies. Yet, as it comes so late in this era’s progress, it should be regarded as a eulogizing capstone rather than a seminal foundation.