Are revolutions in our period better understood as a kind

of natural phenomenon or as a form of learned behaviour?

Revolutions. A very short introduction – Jack Goldstone:

 First chapter outlines how revolutions differ from revolutionary behaviour.
o Example of Storming of Bastille not simply being a revolt but the
beginning of the Rev.
 Paris mob was not demanding the usual eg dismissal of a minister, lower
bread prices etc. but were acting for the National Assembly.

 Broadly two points of view shape our conception of revolutions according to

Goldstone:

o Glory: oppressed masses rise up and overthrow their tyrannical,

absolutist rulers, being led by charismatic figures who lead them.
 Violence may be necessary in order to achieve the end goal.
 Such a conception of revolution was rooted in Greek/Roman
republican ideals and strengthened by American + French Rev.
and by intellectuals like Thomas Paine initially then given a
Marxist zeal by Marx, Lenin, Zedong etc.
o Another vision that revolutions are violent uprisings that precipitate
absolute chaos that inevitably ends up consuming the revolutionary
leaders themselves.
 Such a view was formed by British intellectuals such as Edmund
Burke, Thomas Carlyle and Charles Dickens in response to the
French Rev.
 Later taken up by critics of the 1917 Rev in Russia and human
cost brought about during Mao’s revolutionary govt.
 In reality revolutions often take both forms – sometimes instituting democratic
republics, sometimes implementing dictatorships.
 Generally took a huge deal of organisation to successfully pull off a revolution.
o Myriad examples of revolutionary activity that was easily put down by
govt forces because of how isolated they were.
 General consensus on the definition of revolutions is mixed.
o Forcible change in govt, mass participation, and change in institutions
are accepted as common features.
o However many scholars believe revolutions are always sudden, or that
they entail violence, or in the case of Marxist scholars that some kind of
class-struggle is involved.
 Revs generally diverse and variable.
 Goldstone comes to his own definition of revolution:
 o ‘We can therefore best define revolution in terms of both observed
mass mobilization and institutional change, and a driving ideology
carrying a vision of social justice. Revolution is 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.’
 Important to distinguish between revolutions proper and revolutionary activity.
o Revolutionary activity could include peasant revolts, grain riots, strikes,
social and reform movements, coup d’etats and civil wars. Only under
certain conditions would such events progress into revolution.
 Peasant revolts largely localised and not always aimed at changing form or
modes of govt.
o Same story with grain riots.
 Important to identify revolution as a specific attempt to change the institutions
of government through mass mobilisation ie not simply localised grievances.
 Coup d’etats interesting – new govt institutions may or may not be based on
the ideals of social justice.
o Ataturk or Nasser’s coups probably were revolutions because of the
sweeping changes that they subsequently brought to their countries.
 What makes a revolution is the combination of forms of revolutionary activity:
forcible overthrow of the govt, mass mobilisation, pursuit of social justice and
creation of new political institutions.

 2. What causes revolutions?

 Poverty often seen as a driving force behind Revs – but 1840s Irish potato
famine lead to no Rev.
 Poor peasants throughout Europe often responded to poverty eg crop failures,
high food prices etc with resignation and despair instead of revolution.
o Any prospect of revolutionary activity was likely to be put down by
strong govt forces.
 Notions of poverty and inequality only become revolutionary once the people
experiencing said poverty believe that their plight is the fault of the regime
they’re living under, and not simply nature.
 Ideological shifts perform an important role.
o However introduction of new political ideologies in a revolutionary
manner could only occur if the political elite introduced them, they
could not be transmitted organically into a country.
o Liberalism for example has role to play in revolutions in the pd eg 1848,
but wrong to say that it drove the revs.
 In any case important to remember that nations were not static structures that
could be altered given the right amount of poverty or ideological change or
industrialisation.
 Indeed if the relationship between political elites and ruling class remains
amicable, then it becomes almost impossible for any meaningful revolution to
take place.
 Elites are incredibly important in terms of the stability of society – form the
middle man between the ruling class and the general populace.
 In a stable society, the populace would engage in economic activity so that
they could obtain a sufficient income to support themselves and families, and
to pay rents, taxes to the elites/govt.
 Elites drive most political, economic, religious and educational activity.
o Such elites were protected and rewarded by the rulers for their work,
who themselves help to support the ruling regime.
 Rulers also preoccupied with attempting to avert famine, war, banditry etc so
that the populace can pay tax and be in favour of the status quo.
 This is the idea of a stable society ^^^ or a society at a stable equilibrium
 A society in disequilibrium would feature displeased elites, weak rulers, and
discontented populace as the result of economic hardship.
o Elites blame the weakness of rulers, whilst populace may rail against
the perceived inequality between them and the elites.
 Under such conditions of instability, a very small or seemingly insignificant
event can spark revolution: a foreign war, economic crisis, local rebellion etc.
 So therefore revolutions are not simply cases of growing discontentment, but
are far more complex scenarios in which the social order becomes frayed and
put into disequilibrium.
 However it is exceedingly difficult to identify societies as in a state of relative
equilibrium or disequilibrium.
o Goldstone likens historians of revolutions to geologists – they know
where the fault zones are and consequently where earthquakes
(revolutions) are likely to occur, but we still cannot predict them.
 Historians can identify societies that are under strain from the inability of their
political institutions to perform normal tasks eg French inability to implement
tax reform.
 Generally five characteristics that signify a society is in an unstable
equilibrium:
o National economic or fiscal strains.
 Disrupts income of all members of society.
 Often leads to tax increase/borrowing and hinders ability of
rulers to exercise patronage.
o Instability within the elites.
 Inability to gain favour with rulers could lead to elites attempting
to mobilise the discontents of the general populace.
o Notion of some kind of form of injustice that is seen as the fault of the
rulers or the elites.
 took the form of popular anger from the general populace
 people discontented for whatever reason and seeing the elites
and ruling class as responsible for this, more ready to rise up in
rebellion.
 Erecting barricades an example of this in Paris – done as an
attempt to remove state intervention from ‘liberated
neighbourhoods’.
 o Emergence of effective narratives of resistance against the status quo
 Generally ideological so could be liberalism or nationalism etc
which serves to unify different economic, social groups in the
pursuit of a common purpose.
 Such narratives could be inherently utopian and idealistic, but
this seemed to work most of the time.
o Favourable international relations.
 Presence or indeed absence of international allies/enemies can
turn the tide of a revolution, stop it from happening in the first
place, or indeed spark one a la Brunswick Manifesto.
 Categorising revolutions in such a way has an inherent arbitrary quality to it
but it remains a useful tool of retrospective analysis.
 However the aforementioned five factors which contribute to an unstable
social equilibrium do not explain the revolutions themselves – what were the
reasons for a fraying of social relations?
 Scholars differentiate between structural (long-term) and transient (short term)
causes.
o Structural causes serve to weaken and undermine social relationships
over time, whilst transient events reveal the impact of such structural
trends and often provoke a reaction from potential revolutionaries.
 Demographic change a classic example of a common structural cause of
revolution.
o Rapid growth in pop often leads to greater competition for work so
lower wages. Higher rents, higher prices.
o Competition for prominent positions amongst the elites becomes
fiercer.
 Shift in international relations important eg after Congress of Vienna.
o Especially important in 1848 where the rev in Paris sparked immediate
revs in Prussia, Austria etc.
 Uneven economic development, especially during Industrial Rev. an important
structural cause – burgeoning wealth of businessmen and industrialists whilst
the lot of urban workers seemed to actually decline.
 Transient causes of rev often form the straw that broke the camel’s back.
o Could include spikes in inflation, high food prices, defeat in war etc.
o Such transient events do cause revolutions as they often lead to larger
numbers of the general populace to openly oppose the govt.
 However such transient events only ever lead to successful revolution where
the underlying structural make-up of society allows it to.
o Scholars therefore treat structural change as the fundamental cause of
revolution.

 Revolutionary processes, leaders, and outcomes:

 Revolutions follow two main patterns of state breakdown: central collapse and
peripheral advance.
  Central collapse is essentially the French Rev model – the regime is weak
and lacks legitimacy, possibly near bankruptcy, lack of military loyalty.
o Russian Rev and 1848 also follow this model.
 Revolutions often degenerated into post-revolution infighting which invariably
consumed the leading revolutionary leaders themselves eg Danton,
Robespierre, Trotsky etc.

The Revolutions in Europe, 1848–1849: From Reform to Reaction –

Robert Evans:
 1848 Revolutions directly affected France, Germany, Habsburg Empire and
Italy but indirectly affected many others.
 Five main themes dictated the revolutions:
o opposition to the ancient regime
o clamour for greater political participation
o growing urgency of the social question
o assertion of self-determination
o growing success of counter-rev.
 Many contemporary observers believed that the next great revolution would
occur in Britain where the social question was most stark due to advanced
industrialisation.
 However the revs started in Paris and immediately spread across central and
southern Europe.
o Reasons for rev more social in France, more constitutional and political
in Germany, Austria and Italy.
 Many at the time regarded 1848 as the ‘spring of peoples’ signifying a grand
European revolution.
o Frederic Sorrieu published a lithograph in 1849 on the anniversary of
the Revs dedicated to ‘the martyrs of 1793, 1830 and 1848’.
 Up to 1848 everyone expected a revolution to happen across Europe. Some
argue this became a self-fulfilling prophecy.
 Earlier historians have often treated the Revs of 1848 almost mockingly.
o Regarded them as the fantasies of the Romanticized youth eg Kossuth,
Byron etc.

Road to Revolution: a century of Russian Radicalism – Avraham

Yarmolinksy:

 Alexander I with his minister Speransky seemed to be a reforming

partnership.
 However after the conclusion of the Napoleonic Wars Alexander’s policy took
a significant volte-face, and he was labelled by Lafayette as ‘the head of the
European counter-revolution’.
 o Press censored once again, universities and schools emasculated.
 Russian serfs experienced abject poverty and hardship, and did feel
resentment for this.
o However the nature of Russian agrarian society meant that such serfs
directed their indignation not at the czar Alexander, but at their wealthy
landowners.
 Explains the proliferation of peasant and serf riots throughout
the period.
 It was the Russian officer class that first exhibited revolutionary tendencies in
the Decembrist revolt.
o Had experienced the liberalism of France, and also the nationalism of
fighting the Great Patriotic War of 1812.
o Also because ethnic Germans from the Baltic states were being
preferred for higher appointments over native Russians, a source of
resentment.
 A sort of Russian Romanticism inspired the Decembrists, inspired by
Carbonarist uprisings in Italy and Greek War for Independence. Writings of
Pushkin support this.
 1825 Decembrist revolt began after the death of Alexander I
o This certainly was no natural phenomenon – they had learnt that
modes of govt of liberalism and constitutional monarchy from France
and Central Europe and now aimed to emulate them in Russia.