Theda Skocpol

Thank you for reading my take on Skocpol's FRC's Social Revolutions.

I need to admit my writing error on this piece of work, i.e. a couple of times I used "his & he" to denote Skocpol in this summary. It should be noted that all of these should be both her & she.

Thank you very much.

Fransız İnkilabı tarihin belirli bir safhasında gelişmiş bir kavga değil, belirli süreçler içinde ilerleyen paradigmadır. Belki de Jakoben kanadın sert muhalefeti, hedefine dolayımlı olarak XIV.Louis devlet izleğini koymuştur. Bu sebeple XIV.Louis devrini açımlamak, İnkilabının mimarisini anlamayı sağlar.

İmparatorluk Rusya’sı: Az Gelişmiş Büyük Güç başlığı girişinde yazar; Fransa ve Çin’in aksine Çarlık Rusya’sında devrimci krizlerin savaştaki yenilgi ile ortaya çıktığını belirtir ve ardından “İmparatorluk Devleti ve Serf Ekonomisi” üzerine değinir. Burada Avrasya’da ayakta kalmaya çalışmak için mücadele eden Rusya’ya değinir. Nitekim ayakta kalmaya çalışmasına rağmen 19 yy. ‘da Rusya ağır basan ve korkulan güçlerden biridir.

O artigo analisa como a sociologia histórica renovou a abordagem das relações entre a história e a teoria, ou seja, entre eventos singulares e padrões gerais. A partir de um exame crítico de duas leituras transdisciplinares da Revolução Francesa, sustenta-se que essa linhagem sociológica, subexplorada pelos historiadores contemporâneos, contribui para uma articulação fértil de dois enfoques complementares. Após uma síntese do debate sobre os enlaces entre a sociologia e a história, são comparados e discutidos conceitos, teorias e métodos de Skocpol (1985) e Mann (1993). O diagnóstico sobre a circularidade entre o foco generalizante da sociologia e o da história no singular é matizado numa comparação com a análise de Hobsbawm (1977) sobre a revolução que inquietou os primeiros sociólogos e é o marco historiográfico da transição da Idade Moderna à Contemporânea.

Abstract
The article analyzes how historical sociology renewed the approach to the relationship between history and theory, or between singular events and general patterns. From a critical examination of two transdisciplinary readings of the French Revolution, this paper argues that this sociological lineage, underexploited by contemporary historians, contributes to a fertile articulation of two complementary approaches. After a brief discussion on the bonds between sociology and history, I compare and debate the concepts, theories and methods of Skocpol (1985) and Mann (1993). The diagnosis of the circularity between the generalizing focus of sociology and history's focus on the singular is nuanced by a comparison to Hobsbawm's analysis (1977) of the revolution that disquieted the first sociologists and is the historiographical milestone of the transition from Modern to Contemporary Age.

Today, no sense of legitimacy sustains Iraq as a state; no sovereignty controls the people within the country. This study introduces and develops the concept of “sociocide” in order to account for why the current social system in Iraq cannot establish social order. Sociocide is the killing of the social encompassing all matters pertaining to society, e.g., group solidarity, ethnic, racial, and gender identity, state institutions, and the self-consciousness of the individual when taking the role of another or the generalized other. Since sociocide may not describe something that empirically exists in history, this study develops the notion as a Weberian ideal type. Has the society of Iraq been fatally wounded? While we are skeptical as to whether sociocide has truly taken place, we use the concept to describe the war in Iraq and analyze the sociological significance of its character.

The aim of this article is to explicate the basic types of comparative analysis used in historical-comparative sociology, within the conceptual framework of the idealizational theory of science (ITS), and to determine the usefulness and place of the comparative method in the structure of the idealizational theory. In the second section some classifications of comparative analysis are presented. An analysis of comparative methods used in States and Social Revolutions and what methodological discussion it stimulated is outlined in the third section. Chapter four presents the key tenets of the idealizational theory of science. Chapter five explicates the basic types of comparative analysis within the conceptual framework of the theory and defines the place of that method in the idealizational theory. In the final section, I consider the status of historical-comparative sociology in light of the view of the development of science provided by the idealizational theory.

SPIS TREŚCI:

Przedmowa, s. 7

CZĘŚĆ I. RACJONALNOŚĆ, WOLNOŚĆ, REWOLUCJA. MIKROSPOŁECZNE WYMIARY TEORII SPOŁECZNEJ

Andrzej Falkiewicz,  Człowiek Gombrowiczowski i człowiek Ewangeliczny w teorii socjalizmu Leszka Nowaka, s. 13

Mieszko Ciesielski, Człowiek Gombrowicza a model jednostki racjonalnej, s. 23

Robert Egiert, Pewne wzmocnienie racjonalistycznego modelu człowieka, s.  45

Marcin Paprzycki, Nie-Ewangeliczny model człowieka.  Próba wyjaśnienia psychoanalitycznego, s. 67

Katarzyna Paprzycka, Marcin Paprzycki, Jak dochodzi do wybuchu rewolucji?  s. 77
Krzysztof Brzechczyn, Jednostka a dwa ujęcia rewolucji politycznej w nie-Marksowskim materializmie historycznym, s.  85

Wolfgang Balzer,  Wymiana vs. wpływ: przypadek idealizacji, s. 95

CZĘŚĆ II. REALNY SOCJALIZM, KAPITALIZM, DEMOKRACJA.
MAKROSPOŁECZNE WYMIARY TEORII SPOŁECZNEJ

Leszek Nowak, Katarzyna Paprzycka, Marcin Paprzycki, O wielości ścieżek rozwojowych socjalizmu, s.  113

Mieszko Ciesielski, Problem kumulacji podziałów klasowych we współczesnym  kapitalizmie. Próba analizy teoretycznej, s. 131

Marcin Połatyński, O koalicji i rozłamie partyjnym. Przyczynek do teorii sub-społeczeństwa partyjnego  w nie-Marksowskim materializmie historycznym, s. 155

Katarzyna Paprzycka, Kolektywizm w poziomie – wyzwanie dla Pettita krytyki kolektywizmu, s.  163

CZĘŚĆ III. NIE-MARKSOWSKI MATERIALIZM HISTORYCZNY –
PORÓWNANIA, PARAFRAZY I ANALIZY

Waldemar Czajkowski, Kilka uwag o Leszka Nowaka nie-arksowskim materializmie historycznym oraz Immanuela Wallersteina i Andre G. Franka teoriach systemu światowego,
s. 189
Tomasz Zarębski, Struktura klasowa społeczeństw hydraulicznych. Próba parafrazy teorii Karla Augusta Wittfogla w aparaturze pojęciowej nie-Marksowskiego materializmu historycznego, s. 209

Krzysztof Brzechczyn, Zwycięska rewolucja i przegrana modernizacja.  Próba parafrazy teorii rewolucji społecznych Thedy Skocpol w aparaturze pojęciowej nie-Marksowskiego materializmu historycznego, s.  225

Karolina Rutkowska, Elitarna vs. klasowa teoria demokracji. Próba parafrazy mechanizmu absorpcji elit w teorii Evy Etzioni-Halevy w aparaturze pojęciowej nie-Marksowskiego materializmu historycznego, s. 255

Eliza Karczyńska, Struktura społeczna imperium osmańskiego. Próba analizy teoretycznej, s. 275

Marta Bręgiel-Benedyk,  Obraz struktury społecznej w Manusmryti.Próba analizy w aparaturze pojęciowej nie-Marksowskiego materializmu historycznego, s. 293.

In recent democratic theory, models of participatory and deliberative democracies are often seen as distinct if not divergent. In considering the specific character of the US democracy starting from the eighteenth century, this paper suggests that it is necessary to examine conjointly the political debates and experiences concerned with improving deliberation and widening participation in civic life. From this perspective, the questions of institutional design, participant civic culture, and the translocal organizational strategies of associations will be examined. The analysis points to the conclusion that the civic associational perspective, seeking to resolve the problem of individualism, bridges the gap between deliberation and participation.

Celem artykułu jest rekonstrukcja kryjącego się za wybranymi koncepcjami i teoriami rewolucji ideału społeczeństwa, wizji polityki i sposobów jej uprawiania. Punktem wyjścia przeprowadzonej analizy będzie Marksowska koncepcja rewolucji. W dalszej części artykułu przedstawię główne linie ideowej recepcji teorii Marksa: konserwatywną, anarchistyczną (Bakunin), socjaldemokratyczną (Kautsky), bolszewicką (Lenin) oraz wizję polityki milcząco zakładaną przez teorie rewolucji budowane w ramach socjologii historyczno-porównawczej (Moore, Skocpol, Goldstone).

Forty years after its publication, Theda Skocpol’s States and Social Revolutions remains the pre-eminent book in the study of revolutions. But how should the book be assessed from the vantage point of contemporary world politics? This essay reviews Skocpol’s contribution to three main issue-areas: theory, structural approaches, and the international. It argues that, rich as it has been, the research agenda initiated by States and Social Revolutions has run its course. It cannot respond effectively to the different contexts within which revolutions emerge and the diverse forms they take. Its bifurcation between structure and agency cannot capture the relational character of revolutionary action. And, despite its concern for the international components of revolutions, States and Social Revolutions cannot accommodate the ways in which revolutions are ‘inter-social’ all the way down. A new Skocpol is needed for a new age of revolutions.

The aim of this article is to explicate the basic types of comparative methods used in Theda Skocpol’s States and Social Revolution within the conceptual framework of the Idealizational Theory of Science, and to determine the usefulness and place of the comparative methods in the structure of the idealizational theory. In the introduction, I outline a characterization of comparative-historical sociology. Some classifications of comparative analysis are presented in section
1. An analysis of comparative methods used in Skocpol’s theory of revolutions and what methodological discussion it stimulated is outlined in section 2. Section 3 presents the key tenets of the idealizational theory of science and in section 4 the basic types of comparative analysis (parallel, contrast oriented, and macro-causal) are explicated within the conceptual framework of this theory, thus allowing to locate these methods in the idealizational approach to science. In the
final section, I consider the status of the theory of revolution developed in historical-comparative sociology in light of the vision of the history of scientific knowledge provided by the idealizational approach to science.

When the government and the opposition agreed a preliminary deal (with mediation from the EU and Russia’s Ombudsman) on February 21, there was already a scenario of ‘multiple sovereignty’ - one of the crucial elements in a revolutionary situation according to Charles Tilly. The maydanivtsiv – the Euromaidan protesters – did not accept any negotiation with the President and demanded his resignation. A day later Yanukovych fled Kiev, and the Parliament impeached him and shaped a new government which was then welcomed by the EU and the US. A forcible transfer of power had been fulfilled – what Tilly would call a ‘revolutionary result.’ The question addressed here is: should we think of this as a revolution in Tilly’s terms, or in Skocpol’s?

Przedmiotem artykułu jest analiza związków metodologicznych pomiędzy dwiema teoriami rewolucji opracowanymi w socjologii historyczno-porównawczej: Thedy Skocpol i Jacka A. Goldstone'a. W pierwszej części artykułu scharakteryzuję metody badawcze stosowane w socjologii historyczno-porównawczej oraz przedstawię klasyfikację teorii i typów rewolucji. W dalszej części artykułu zostaną przedstawione koncepcje Skocpol i Goldstone'a, zaś w części ostatniej-idealizacyjna rekonstrukcja związków pomiędzy obiema teoriami.

Celem artykułu jest parafraza w aparaturze pojęciowej nie-Marksowskiego materializmu historycznego teorii rewolucji opracowanej przez Thedę Skocpol. W poszczególnych rozdziałach artykułu parafrazowane są pojęcia modernizacji, władzy państwowej, społeczeństwa agrarnej biurokracji i mechanizmu zwycięskiej rewolucji społecznej. Dokonana parafraza pozwala wyróżnić dwa typy społeczeństw agrarnej biurokracji. W ekonomicznej odmianie tego typu społeczeństwa zwycięska rewolucja prowadzi do udanej modernizacji, zaś odmianie politycznej społeczeństwa agrarnej biurokracji – do nieudanej modernizacji.

The purpose of this paper is to paraphrase in notion apparatus of non-Marxian historical materialism the theory of revolution elaborated by Theda Skocpol. In successive chapters the notions of modernization, the nature of state power, society of agrarian bureaucracy and mechanism of victorious revolution are paraphrased. This paraphrase allows to distinguish two kinds of agrarian bureaucracies resulting in two different outcome of social revolution. In case of the agrarian bureaucracy of economical type the victorious revolution led to successful modernization but in case of agrarian bureaucracy of economical type, the victorious revolution led to unsuccessful modernization.

In my research, I tried to explain relationship between The Islamic Revolution of Iran and Skocpol’s approach on revolution. The Islamic Revolution took place in 1979 that a constitutional monarchy led by Mohammad Reza Pahlavi evolved Ayatollah Khomeini led the Islamic Sharia law and based on the views of the Shiite sect of the Islamic Republic. And the Shiite dictatorship was established. Iranian revolution put an end to the 2500 years of monarchy. Khomeini set up a theocracy that refuses the revolutionary struggles of freedom, independence and social justice advocate, although ultimately the basic human freedoms of the people of Iran.
Skocpol’s structural analysis couldn’t explain the Islamic Revolution in Iran. This revolution affected by different internal dynamics and the different sectors was realized as a result of collecting around certain ideals. I will explain to evaluate the different social classes (workers, capitalists and bazaar merchants, students, clergy, etc.) within the framework of the Islamic revolution in Iran.