Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T11:35:15.141Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Group Violence

Some Hypotheses and Empirical Uniformities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2024

Anthony Oberschall
Anthony Oberschall*
Affiliation:
Yale University
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Since group violence is but one of several means of conducting conflict, explanation for its occurrence must be embedded in a comprehensive theory of conflict. Yet violent conflict is so topical and important that an effort to reflect on it sociologically is well worth undertaking at this time even in the absence of a comprehensive theory of social conflict. Indeed, Max Weber (1947: 133) has written that “the treatment of conflict involving the use of physical violence as a separate type is justified by the special characteristics of the employment of this means and the corresponding peculiarities of the sociological consequences of its use.” In this essay, I shall avoid definitional and typological exercises, and concentrate rather on specific, testable hypotheses and empirical uniformities of group violence that have been put forward and commented upon at various times. I shall also present some data and findings bearing on the hypotheses that, while not “testing” them in rigorous fashion, will do more than simply provide plausible illustrations that can always be found whenever a large body of historical and contemporary cases is carefully searched. The final aim of the paper is to link up these hypotheses and uniformities in more systematic fashion than is presently available although the paper does not spell out a systematic theory of group violence. At this stage of theory when a plausible case can be made for a large number of hypotheses, it is important to spell out the specific conditions under which specific hypotheses are thought to be applicable.

Type
Research Article
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , August 1970 , pp. 61 - 92
Copyright
Copyright © 1970 The Law and Society Association.

References

BRINTON, C. (1957) The Anatomy of Revolution. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
COMMONS, J. R. (1935) History of Labour in the United States, IV. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
COMMONS, J. R.. (1918) History of Labour in the United States, II. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
CONOT, R. (1967) Rivers of Blood, Years of Darkness. New York: Bantam.Google Scholar
COSER, L. (1967) Continuities in the Study of Social Conflict. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
DAHRENDORF, R. (1959) Class and Class Conflict in Industrial Society. Palo Alto: Stanford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
DARVALL, F. (1934) Popular Disturbances and Public Order in Regency England. London: Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
ECKSTEIN, H. (1964) Internal War. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
GERSCHENKRON, A. (1966) Bread and Democracy in Germany. New York: Fertig.Google Scholar
GERSCHENKRON, A. (1964) “Reflections on economic aspects of revolutions,” Pp. 180–204 in Eckstein, H. (ed.) Internal War. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
GRIMSHAW, A. (1960) “Urban racial violence in the U.S.” Amer. J. of Sociology 66 (September): 109–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
GURR, T. R. (1967) The Conditions of Civil Violence. Princeton: Center of International Studies, Research Monograph 28.Google Scholar
HEBERLE, R. (1951) Social Movements. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
HEBERLE, R. (1945) From Democracy to Nazism. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State Univ. Press.Google Scholar
HICKS, J. D. (1961) The Populist Revolt. Lincoln: Nebraska Univ. Press.Google Scholar
HOBSBAWM, E. J. (1959) Primitive Rebels. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
HODGKIN, T. (1957) Nationalism in Colonial Africa. New York: New York Univ. Press.Google Scholar
HUNTINGTON, S. (1968) Political Order in Changing Societies. New Haven: Yale Univ. Press.Google Scholar
HUNTINGTON, S. (1962) “Patterns of violence in world politics,” Pp. 17–50 in Huntington, S. (ed.) Changing Patterns of Military Politics. Glencoe: Free Press.Google Scholar
KERR, C. and A., SIEGEL (1954) “The inter-industry propensity to strike,” Pp. 189–212 in Kornhauser, A., Dubin, R. and Ross, A. (eds.) Industrial Conflict. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
KILLIAN, L. (1964) “Social movements,” Pp. 426–455 in Faris, R. (ed.) Handbook of Modern Sociology. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
LEE, A. M. and N. D., HUMPHREY (1943) Race Riot. New York: Dryden.Google Scholar
LEE, S. (1951) “Agrarianism and social upheaval in China.” Amer. J. of Sociology 56 (May): 511–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LORWIN, V. (1957) “Reflections on the history of the French and American labor movements.” J. of Economic History 17 (March): 25–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNEELEY, J. (1966) “Origins of the Zapata revolt in Morelos.” Hispanic-Amer. Historical Rev. 46 (May): 153–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MOORE, B. (1966) Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy. Boston: Beacon.Google Scholar
National Advisory Commission (1968) Report of the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders. New York: Bantam.Google Scholar
OLSON, M. Jr. (1963) “Rapid economic growth as a destabilizing force.” J. of Economic History 23 (December): 529–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
PETTEE, G. (1938) The Process of Revolution. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
POSTGATE, R. (1962) Revolution from 1789 to 1906. New York: Harper Torchbook.Google Scholar
RICHARDSON, L. (1960) Statistics of Deadly Quarrels. Chicago: Quadrangel.Google Scholar
RUDE, G. (1964) The Crowd in History. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
RUDE, G. (1959) The Crowd in the French Revolution. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
SMELSER, N. J. (1968) Essays in Sociological Explanation. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
SMELSER, N. J. (1964) “Collective behavior and conflict.” Sociological Q. 5 (Spring): 116–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SMELSER, N. J. (1963) Theory of Collective Behavior. New York: Free Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
STONE, L. (1965) “Theories of revolution.” World Politics 18 (January): 159–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
TAFT, P. (1966) “Violence in American labor disputes.” Annals of the Amer. Academy of Social and Pol. Sci. (March): 127–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
TILLY, C. (1964) The Vendee. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press.Google Scholar
TILLY, C. (1965) Measuring Political Upheaval. Princeton: Center of International Studies, Research Monograph 19.Google Scholar
de TOCQUEVILLE, A. (1955) The Old Regime and the French Revolution. New York: Doubleday Anchor.Google Scholar
TROTSKY, L. (1959) The Russian Revolution. New York: Doubleday Anchor.Google Scholar
TURNER, R. (1964) “Collective behavior and conflict.” Sociological Q. 5 (Spring): 122–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
United Nations (1957) Report of the Special Committee on the Problem of Hungary. New York: General Assembly, Eleventh Session, Supp. No. 18 (A/3592).Google Scholar
WEBER, M. (1958) From Max Weber, Essays in Sociology. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
WEBER, M. (1947) The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. Glencoe: Free Press.Google Scholar
WASKOW, A. (1967) From Race Riot to Sit-in, 1919 and the 1960s. New York: Doubleday Anchor.Google Scholar