Theories of conflict and social mobilization in revolutionary movements

Conflict and Conflict Resolution

Conflict & Conflict Resolution

A theoretical perspective

Discussion of Various Theories

Rational Choice Theory

Charles Tilly's from Mobilization to Revolution

Durkheim's Concept of Anomie

Relative Deprivation Theory

Suicide Bombing in the Light of Rational Choice Theory & Tilly' Collective Action

Palestine-Israel Conflict & Relative deprivation theory

Burton's Version of Conflict Management

Tilly's Conflict with Relative Deprivation Theory

Discussion of Various Theories

Rational Choice Theory

Economics is one of the governing fields when it comes to social sciences. It presents an idea that money acts as a source of motivation and the probability that one can make profits by following a certain pattern has given rise to a rather predictable human behavior following a formal construct. This success of economics has made other sociologists to follow a similar logic in their theories as well and many of them have constructed their theories around a simple notion that every action has a rational basis and the individuals and entities perform a cost-benefit analysis before making any decision. This approach is called a rational choice theory or in the language of social sciences, "exchanges theory" (Browning et al. 2000)

B: Charles Tilly's from Mobilization to Revolution

In his work, From Mobilization to Revolution, Charles Tilly has given extensive account of basic ideas which later on became important in the process of theorizing the social revolutions. As per Tilly, there is a difference between mere mobilization of resources and revolution. Similarly, there is a distinguished line between a revolutionary situation and revolutionary outcome. As per Tilly, the social groups who are intending to bring revolutionary changes need efficient resources such money, human resources, media support etc. For the success of their cause however where these resources need to be efficient, the organization is more important than the resources alone (Tilly, 1978, p. 1-57). Charles Tilly presents a political view of a resources mobilization theory and illustrates that it is organizations that should be goal-oriented and be able to bring about social movements with a certain financial, organizational and other controls over the revolutionary outcomes. He presents the idea that revolutions only take place when those challenging power are in a state of mobilizing various forms of resources and the revolutionary outcome takes place when this mobilization is greater than the capacity of the state to mobilize its coercive, material, and administrative resources (Li, 2012).

C: Durkheim's Concept of Anomie

Emile Durkheim first coined this legendary term in his book, "The division of labor in society" in 1897. His concept of anomie described a state which refers to the lack of social norms or normlessness. It refers to the breakage of social bonding between the person and the community that he earlier belonged to. This lack of social adherence results in disintegration of social individuality and leads to absence of self-regulatory norms. He perceived this state as a rule which presents absences of other rules or in other words, 'derangement'. As per Durkheim, The conflict between the evolved organic division of labor and the homogeneous mechanical type was such that one could not long exist in the presence of the other. He used this idea to present the rationale of industrialization as the individuals could not confirm to the social norms surrounding them which lead to industrial change. He concluded that normlessness is a symptom of anomie which would lead to evolution of new self-regulatory rules (Orru, 1983, p. 499-518).

D: Relative Deprivation Theory

Relative deprivation theory is based on an idea of feeling that the individuals experience when they compare themselves to others and believe that they have been offered / provided less than what they are entitled to. It further explains the feeling of discontent which exhibits after experiencing deprivation (which can be of social, economic and political nature) of something that one believes to be justifiably theirs. This theory has important implications on the behaviors of individuals as emotions arising under this feeling can cause stress to the individuals, politically manipulated attitudes and contribution to any form of collective action (Morgan, 2003, p.71). The most evident examples supporting this theory are various social movements such as civil war, recent wave of terrorism, rioting etc. (Walker & Smith, 2001, p.1-91).

2: Suicide Bombing in the Light of Rational Choice Theory & Tilly' Collective Action

The rational choice theory and Tilly's work provide two different set of justifications for suicide bombing. Considering the rational choice model, a material or any other form of gain act as a source of motivation for the individual. The idea is drawn from the economics view of profit making which insists that a human behavior can be altered or directed in a certain manner by providing a source of motivation. In today's world, most of the suicides bombing attacks are undertaken by Muslim terrorists groups. If we try to understand their ideology, we would come to know that if a Muslim fighting in perusal of justice (as defined by their religion) dies, he will be offered many gains and blessings in the after-life. Also, the idea of seeking revenge or causing harm to the enemy is so overwhelming offering such great benefit that giving up one's life appears to be the minimum cost that they have to bear. Considering these two points, the rational choice theory suggests that the sole decision of a suicide bomber is based on a cost-benefit analysis. Here, the benefit offered by the whole action is causing harm to the enemy (which cannot be mitigated) and benefits of afterlife provide a complete rationale for this particular decision (Olsun, 1965, p.106).

On the other hand, Tilly provides a model of political rebellion. He explains that the suicide bomber adheres to a certain set of beliefs shared by group of contenders challenging social power dominions. These dominions are formal structures bearing major dominance in the society. It is collective political contention which forces the individual to perform a suicide as an act of sacrifice in the path of a noble cause which would benefit one's community or the relevant group. It is the power of collective action which provides the bomber a feeling of content and makes him believe that he/she is playing role in the social revolution. It is the collection action of violence which persuades the suicide bomber that the struggle would take an advance turn and would move from a primitive level to reactive or proactive level due to this act. Hence, it would be more effective and would lead to the achievement of noble cause (Hunt, 1984, p.253-264).

Where both the theories offer grounds for a similar act, they are based on common grounds as well. There is a motivating force which provides reasonable justification to the suicide bomber for his or her act. However, the nature of motivation is a distinguishing factor which draws a line of distinction between the two theories. Where rational choice theory offers personal gains for such act, Tilly's work focuses on adherence of one to the collective cause. Rational choice theory act as a source of personal satisfaction to the bomber and make him believe that he will receive personal gains out of this act, Tilly argues that the bomber does seek satisfaction based on the comfort that others will enjoy out of his act. Both the theories can be used as a source of crime prevention dependent on the source of motivation for the suicide bomber. Where the bomber believes that an after-life gain is waiting for him, rational choice theory will be the active theoretical factor otherwise Tilly's work needs to be considered.

4: Burton's Version of Conflict Management

As per John Burton, the conflicts in between humans arise when their basic needs are not met. These needs are not hierarchical, but rather sought all together: security or safety, meaning both stability and freedom from fear; identity, defined by needs theorists as a sense of self in relation to the outside world; recognition, including the recognition of one's identity and recognition from the others; family and community; and personal development, which includes a dimension of personal fulfillment, or in other words "the need to reach one's potential in all areas of life. The non-fulfillment of these needs is governed by three phenomena (Burton, 1997, p. 32).

The first phenomenon is the inherent ability of individuals to conform to institutions they are living in together. Considering the historical background, Israelis have an inherent difficulty living with Muslim community as they are believed to be abused by Muslims in late 15th century. Such historical background now provides a justification to remain detached from this community. On the other hand, Muslims have religious restrictions while living with Jews. It is the teaching of their holy book that Jews cannot be trusted. This is the reason why Muslims o f Palestine cannot confirm to this norm imposed on them (Burton, 1997, p. 16).

In this respect, the second cause of conflict as defined by Burton is the current nature of is the nature of norms and institutions as they have now evolved. The current evolution of institutions in the case of Israel-Palestine issue has made the situation rather controversial. This evolution has made Israelis the governing body of the whole land which is not acceptable the Muslims of that area as they perceive themselves to be the rightful owner of this land. On the other hands, Muslims of Palestine has evolved in to highly aggressive military groups which are big a question for the sovereignty of Israel itself.

Third possible cause of the conflict as defined by Burton is the compliance system observed by the authorities to ensure conformation to the norms. In the case of Palestinian Muslims, they have been forced to follow the pattern of life as defined by Israelis on the basis of self-employed government and forced deprivation of their land, which is not acceptable to them. Whereas Israelis believe that now they have what is rightfully theirs and any rebellious act by the Muslims of Palestine cannot make them withdraw what they have occupied.

All these three notions are driven by the basic needs of two communities. Both aspire to be safe and secure, have a unique identity, and aspire to have rights which are recognized by others and aim to develop personally and community wise. Failure to accomplish these needs causes conflicts in three possible ways.

5: Tilly's Conflict with Relative Deprivation Theory

Relative deprivation theory relates to the frustration that individuals experience due to their perceived degree of achievements and rights and the actual status. The theory concludes that it is the comparison between one's status and that of opposing party which makes the deprived ones undergo extensive stress leading to the feeling of deprivation. This feeling further causes frustration leading to riots, conflicts and violence.

On the other hand, Tilly believes that revolutions only take place when those challenging power are in a state of mobilizing various forms of resources and the revolutionary outcome takes place when this mobilization is greater than the capacity of the state to mobilize its coercive, material, and administrative resources. Furthermore, Tilly in his book, "Durable Inequality" says that social categories often result in categorical inequalities however not all categorical distinctions among people result in economic or political disparities across the resulting groups -- for example, "good sense of humor/bad sense of humor" doesn't appear to result in income disparities across the humorous and the humorless. But the male-female wage gap, the black-white wealth gap, and the white-Latino education gap all are examples of inequalities that follow from, and are presumably caused by, the categorical status possessed by the two groups.

The social mechanisms that Tilly identifies as being primarily responsible for inequalities across social categories are exploitation and opportunity hoarding. Exploitation, which operates when powerful, connected people command resources from which they draw significantly increased returns by coordinating the efforts of outsiders whom they exclude from the full value added by that effort. Opportunity hoarding which operates when members of a categorically bounded network acquire access to a resource that is valuable, renewable, subject to monopoly, supportive of network activities, and enhanced by the network's modus operandi (Tilly, 1999, p. 9-10)

Where Relative deprivation theory illustrates the uniform resultant of deprivation, Tilly argues that this inequality is durable and is rooted into the society not resulting into conflict all the time. Furthermore, during his research in 1972, he tested a set of data illustrating collective violence from 1830-1960 in France in the light of Relative deprivation theory and concluded that no relationship can be found between instances of violence and the conditions of perceived hardships. This empirical research made Tilly disagree with the relative deprivation theory (Roy, 1973, p.2).