An Unstable Equilibrium - Prelude to Revolt
Anatomy of Revolution, Part 1
This is part one of a several (not sure how many yet) part series on revolution. This will be a long running series throughout the next few seasons of the podcast. Given the state of America right now, it is possible that I will upload more frequently, but I will determine that later. Regardless, it is in these moments of high tension that looking to history is paramount. We do this to observe the patterns, to follow the lives of the pivotal players, and to avoid making the same mistakes again. In this part, I discuss what causes revolutionary movements to fester just before they break out.
A revolution is an idea which has found its bayonets.
— Napoleon Bonaparte
What is Revolution?
At first glance, this seems like it ought to be a simple question. One may picture George Washington standing at the bow of a row boat with the Betsy Ross flying above him. Someone else may picture Vladimir Lenin giving an enthralling speech standing above an enraptured crowd. One last person may picture a lifeless King Louis XVI kneeling across a guillotine, head held high by his executioner. These may be clear examples to the average person, but it is possible that the same people would call mass labor movements, Nathaniel Bacon burning down Jamestown, or the Boxer Rebellion revolutions even though many experts do not consider them to be. So, before exploring the many facets of revolution, I must first define it.
In his book No Other Way Out: States and Revolutionary Movements, 1945-1991, Jeff Goodwin employs a broad definition of revolution. He describes revolution as
any and all instances in which a state or political regime is overthrown and thereby transformed by a popular movement in an irregular, extraconstitutional, and/or violent fashion; this definition assumes that revolutions, at least those truly worthy of the name, necessarily require the mobilization of large numbers of people against the existing state.
Jack A. Goldstone, in Revolutions: A Very Short Introduction, uses a more clearly delineated definition of revolution. It involves
the forcible overthrow of a government through mass mobilization (whether military or civilian or both) in the name of social justice, to create new political institutions.
In this definition, if any piece of this triumvirate is missing, then the conflict is not a revolution. For instance, the labor movements were a mass movement within America that arose in the name of social justice, but with no goal to overthrow the government as a whole and create new institutions. More often than not, these smaller, more localized events are part of a revolution, but do not constitute one on their own.
Seeds of Revolution
There is no single way or strict playbook for revolution. Each successful one has similarities and differences to other successful and even unsuccessful revolutions. However, there are some common factors that can lead to a revolutionary movement arising in a society. Whether these factors lead to revolution at all, let alone a successful one, is not automatic. The actual outbreak of revolution will be covered in a later edition of this series, but in this one I will discuss up to the point of breaking out.
For a long time, there have been overarching theories about the causes of revolution, like modernization and Marxism. However, more recent revolutions in history have undermined those ideas. While rapid modernization and class struggle have led to revolutions in the past, they are far from reliable predictors. Many countries have been able to modernize without revolution. For instance, in Saudi Arabia the autocrats gained power with modernization and in Canada modernization brought forth a transition to democracy1. Furthermore, the Marxist idea that socialism supersedes capitalism has been undermined throughout the Third World. Several countries in Eastern Europe even converted back to capitalism2.
Replacing these theories is a more complex idea that revolutions emerge from a unstable environment brought upon via the structure of any given society. Goldstone postulates that societies are moved to revolution when an unstable equilibrium is reached. Equilibrium can be visualized with a ball in the bottom of a valley or on the top of a hill. A ball that is not moving is in static equilibrium, but once it is moved by some force, the location matters. In stable equilibrium, the ball is in a valley, so if it is forced away from it’s resting point it will settle back to its starting point. It may move past the starting point several times, but eventually it will stop. If the ball is at the apex of a hill, any force, even an extremely small force, will cause the ball to move rapidly away from the starting point as it will have no other force to bring it back to rest.
This unstable equilibrium that breeds revolution does not occur randomly. It is instead, according to Goldstone, “a complex process that emerges from the social order becoming frayed in many areas at once.”3 This unstable equilibrium is brought upon by the combination of five different factors that develop in societies: economic strain, elite alienation, popular anger, shared revolutionary narratives, and favorable international relations.
ECONOMIC STRAIN
This factor seems the most obvious, and is the issue that is shared between the modernization and Marxist theories of revolution. This economic strain is felt at the highest levels of government, often leading to higher taxes, but lesser funding for services. This can also lead to the state prioritizing certain institutions that are widely unpopular. For states dealing with this problem, it is entirely possible that earlier reforms that would have worked to alleviate the injustice only further prove the weakness of the state. Goodwin states that revolutionary movements form when “the state sponsors or protects economic, social, or cultural arrangements that are widely viewed as grievous.”4
In the run up to the American Revolution the British Parliament worked hard to recoup the costs of the Seven Years War. By the middle of the eighteenth century, the colonies enjoyed greater wealth than the mother country. The colonies had also become more heavily integrated throughout the century and the crown felt they could help pay for this war. To do so, new taxes were imposed on the colonists. These new taxes were protested and some colonists refused to pay, entirely. This created an internal rift among the colonists between the loyalists to the crown and rebels looking to forge a new path.
ELITE ALIENATION
Goldstone argues that revolutions do not occur without a partnership between the elites in society and the common people. Without this partnership, the conflict ends as a mere strike or peasant rebellion. The elites are able to reach the ear of leadership and call for reform or even form coalitions to overthrow the current regime. They are often pitted against each other by an authoritarian leader in order to weaken their standing. The elites that form half of this partnership are those that have been driven aside by the regime. Most elites seek the status quo, so undermining them only hurts the counterrevolutionary movement. Sometimes, this alienation and division can push some of the elites towards revolution.
In 1789 in France, the Third Estate, the bureaucrats and other professionals, began to get uneasy. Riots wreaked havoc after a famine and debts ballooned. Therefore, the Third Estate called for major reforms to quell the masses. However, in a meeting between the Estates, the First (nobility) and Second (clergy) tried to undermine the power of the Third by voting by estate. Essentially, two wolves and a sheep were set to vote for what to eat for dinner. So, these elites, frustrated with the deadlock, allied with the lower rungs of the other Estates and declared that they spoke for all of France and moved to create a new government.
POPULAR ANGER
There is no revolution without some sort of feeling that the society is no longer working for the common man. This is not always necessitated by poverty or inequality, but it is always the result of the actions of the current regime. This anger needs to spread to multiple regions of a society, both geographically and socially. Goodwin further states that if an aggrieved group believes that their ability to gain any standing in the state is undermined, then they are more likely to become revolutionary. On the flip side, some regimes were successful in skirting revolution by including, albeit in limited fashion, these aggrieved groups.
The protests that erupted after the embarrassing loss to Japan in 1905 forced the Russian tsar to put forth reforms to quell the anger. But, the human meat grinder that turned on along the Eastern Front during World War I lead to more consistent food shortages throughout Russia. Protests again broke out throughout the country, starting with a march of thousands of women on February 23, 1917. These protests were fired upon leading to evermore chaos and many Russian officials and police began to defect. As the chaos mounted, the government’s power was broken, and the tsar was forced to abdicate.
SHARED NARRATIVE
The anger that is felt is then focused into a single narrative frame. There is no single way for this narrative to form. It can be based on religious beliefs or secular. It may be related to fighting against injustice or fighting for national liberation. Regardless, these narratives “create a sense of shared identity and righteousness among the opposition.”5 This narrative can often be formed or spread as a result of an increase in state violence. The aggrieved who face harsh treatment, and even death, from the society they live in are “more likely to view such a society as in need of a fundamental reorganization.”6 These narratives are often formed from a collective myth or local tradition, and they are most often vague in their plan for the future.
Europe in the beginning of the 18th century was largely controlled by monarchies. However, the successful constitutional revolutions in America and France acted as inspiration around the continent. Anti-monarchical sentiments spread quickly from country to country and in 1848 a wave of revolutions swept across Europe. In Denmark, Switzerland, France (again), and Prussia the monarchy was undermined or completely removed.
FAVORABLE INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
The last piece is support from another nation, usually one near the same strength as the regime being overthrown. In order to outlast the existing regime when fighting breaks out, having strong international relationships is essential to prevent losing a war of attrition. These relationships can also be beneficial in the opposite direction. The outside nation might despise the current regime so much as to help undermine them. Without this, there is no outside source of support can lead to violent repression without recourse.
Throughout the 1950s in Cuba, Fidel Castro used his guerilla army to try to take down the dictatorship of Fulgenico Batista and install a communist regime. The militia took hard losses, but persevered through skillful tactics. Cuba’s most vital trade partner was the United States, but the brutal violence that was inflicted by Batista revolted Dwight Eisenhower, who enacted an arms embargo on Cuba. This embargo turned the tide against Batista.
Just the Prologue
These facets of unstable equilibrium are not direct causes of revolution, merely the conditions in which revolution happens most often. Furthermore, an unstable equilibrium does not always lead to revolution. Examples are hard to find for those moments in history because the state of a society is most often analyzed after some event, a revolution, rebellion, or riot. So, it can be hard to find moments where these conditions are met, but there is no outbreak. Goldstone states that predicting revolutions, even among revolutionaries, has proven difficult. Goodwin lays out that even if all of the conditions are met, then revolutionary movements will incubate, but revolution can be avoided. There needs to be an impetus for a revolution. These can come from slow, gradual changes that undermine social institutions or they can come from sudden changes driving society into instability.
For the fire to start, there needs to be a lot of heat or there needs to be a spark.
Goldstone, Jack A. Revolutions: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press. 2014. pg. 12.
Goodwin, Jeff. No Other Way Out: States and Revolutionary Movements, 1945-1991. Cambridge University Press. 2001. pg. 20.
Goldstone. pg. 15.
Goodwin. pg. 46.
Goldstone. pg. 18.
Goodwin. pg. 48.