Political Science Essay
How, when, and why do revolutions (or coups) occur or fail to occur?
In 2014, students marched in Kyiv demanding change from the government under
pro-Russian President Yanukovych. In one day, the university march became a revolution,
managing to overthrow the government and create new institutions. 6 years later, Ukraine
received a significant number of Belarussian refugees that fled authoritarian regime of
another pro-Russian president, Lukashenko. Despite their shared Soviet history, Ukraine and
Belarus have taken different political paths, with one undergoing a revolution for democracy
and the other remaining under authoritarian rule. What has led to this split of countries that
share a similar history, culture, and geography? And if these shared criteria for triggering a
revolution are not enough, then the question rises to: “How, when, and why do revolutions
occur or fail to occur?”.
The label of “revolutionary” has become a popular synonym for “rebellious” or
“innovative” across various spheres of life. But does a revolution equal to the rest of social
changes? Revolution is a collective mobilization that forcibly overthrows a government
through mass mobilization (whether military or civilian or both) in the name of social justice,
to create new political institutions.1
Political Science scholars have created multiple theories of defining the preconditions
of revolutions. Jack Goldstone, sociologist, and politician had divided them into 3
generations of revolutionary theory which base their analysis on the Great Revolutions. 2
However, in the 21st century, specifically because of the Arab Spring uprisings, these theories
fell behind in understanding what could become a revolution, as they do not consider
influence of social- factors, relying heavily on political and economic dogmas.
Therefore, one must see revolutions as a result of political and economic instabilities
underlined by the three generations of general theory, yet also consider revolutions as living
entities, which pre-conditions are constantly re-shaped by social factors.
The 3 generations of revolutionary thought theorize on reasons, process, and
consequences of revolutionary movements. Throughout the 20th century, each following
1
Goldstone, J. A. (2014). Revolutions a very short introduction. Oxford Academic. Oxford University
Press.
2
Lawson, G. (2016). Within and Beyond the “Fourth Generation” of Revolutionary Theory.
Sociological Theory, 34(2), 106–127.
3. Aya, R. (1979). Theories of revolution reconsidered - JSTOR. Retrieved March 20, 2023
, Political Science Essay
How, when, and why do revolutions (or coups) occur or fail to occur?
generational theory added a new factor to a pre-existing base. However, justification to the
workability of these theories falls behind, as they bid on anecdotal historical evidence.3
“The fever” was a description given to a revolutionary movement by the 1 st generation, Crane
Brinton. In his book “The anatomy of revolutions” he identified 3 major “symptoms” behind
an outbreak: 1) loss of confidence with the old regime; 2) emergence of new political
ideologies; 3) intensification of social tensions.4 His argument puts a major importance on the
regime’s inability to deal with military, economic or political changes, and underlines it as
the main precondition of why revolutions occur. However, what was later criticized by the
next wave of scholars, is 1st generations inability to create strong theoretic case instead of a
descriptive image. 5
The second generation jumped in to deeper theorize the question of “how, when, and why”.
Drawing on psychology, sociology, and political science, they agreed that defining factors of
any revolutions are: 1) frustration with the current political regime; 2) state in a severe
disequilibrium; 3) multiple sovereignty. J-curve by Ted Robert Gurr emphasizes development
and modernization that creates a feeling of “unrealized expectations”, leading to the
mentioned factors.6 The question stands, though, “How come modernization did not cause a
revolution in Brazil, India, Japan or Canada?”. Abrupt change is not a leading factor, but
rather a part of a bigger revolutionary narrative. The two generations were able to support
their theories only because of micro-perspective, analyzing narrow history and overlooking
discrepancies with the present.
The third generation, represented by structuralist scholars, had taken on a more coherent
concept: revolutions occur because of Marco conditions, where a “middle peasant” plays role,
there is a state crisis due-to elite fractures and demographic changes that weaken the
legitimacy of governments.7 The third generation, summoned in Skocpol’s work attributes
attention to the post-Marxist class struggle as a main “why” of revolutions.
What all these theories have in common, is their over-reliance on historical analysis of the
Great Revolutions – America, Russia, England, and France. Analysis of modernization,
unrealized expectation and class struggles are all factors applicable to a small handful of
states.8 It is hopeless to create an objective truth even in discussing the Great Revolutions, as
3
4
J. Beck, C., & P. Ritter, D. (2021). Review of Thinking Beyond Generations: On the Future of Revolution
Theory. Journal of Historical Sociology.
5
Lawson, G. (n.d.). Anatomies of revolution. Cambridge Core. Retrieved March 17, 2023
6
Goldstone, J. A. (1980, April). Review of Theories of Revolution: The Third Generation. 425–453.
7
Goldstone, J. A. (1980, April). Review of Theories of Revolution: The Third Generation. 425–453.
8
Beck, C., & P. Ritter, D. (2021). Review of Thinking Beyond Generations: On the Future of Revolution
Theory. Journal of Historical Sociology.
