Abstract
Using two unusual surveys, this study analyzes participation in the 2004 Orange Revolution in Ukraine, comparing participants with revolution supporters, opponents, counter-revolutionaries, and the apathetic/inactive. As the analysis shows, most revolutionaries were weakly committed to the revolution's democratic master narrative, and the revolution's spectacular mobilizational success was largely due to its mobilization of cultural cleavages and symbolic capital to construct a negative coalition across diverse policy groupings. A contrast is drawn between urban civic revolutions like the Orange Revolution and protracted peasant revolutions. The strategies associated with these revolutionary models affect the roles of revolutionary organization and selective incentives and the character of revolutionary coalitions. As the comparison suggests, postrevolutionary instability may be built into urban civic revolutions due to their reliance on a rapidly convened negative coalition of hundreds of thousands, distinguished by fractured elites, lack of consensus over fundamental policy issues, and weak commitment to democratic ends.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Political Science and International Relations,Sociology and Political Science
Reference62 articles.
1. Beissinger Mark , Amaney Jamal , and Kevin Mazur . 2012. “Who Participates in ‘Democratic’ Revolutions? A Comparison of the Egyptian and Tunisian Revolutions.” Paper prepared for the annual convention of the American Political Science Association. August 29–September 2, New Orleans, LA.
2. Is Revolution Individually Rational?
3. Enough! Electoral Fraud, Collective Action Problems, and Post-Communist Colored Revolutions
4. States and Social Revolutions
5. Resistance and Rebellion
Cited by
169 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献