“The occurrence of revolutionary situations in the first place and the nature of the new regimes that emerged from revolutionary conflicts depends fundamentally on the structures of state organizations and their partially autonomous and dynamic relationships to domestic class and political forces as well as their positions in relation to other states abroad.”

-Theda Skocpol 1979

In an increasingly globalized world, what constitutes a revolutionary outcome? Theda Skocpol’s book, States and Social Revolutions (1979) introduced a groundbreaking idea to the world of structural revolutionary theory: revolutions are rare. According to Skocpol, “Revolutionary causation and outcomes are necessarily affected by world-historical changes in the fundamental structures and bases of state power” (Skocpol, 1979, pg. 288). Skocpol theorized that events 1) shaped by international politics and 2) that change the fabric of society constitute revolutions. Events that both contour international politics and alter deeply society are the revolutions most worth studying.

Theda Skocpol’s Early Life

Skocpol, born in May 1947, grew up during the time of the civil rights movement and the anti-Vietnam war protests in the United States. These tumultuous world events influenced Skocpol’s path towards studying revolutionary theory. After receiving her B.A. in Sociology, Skocpol acquired her M.A. and Ph.D. at Harvard, studying under her mentor, Barrington Moore (Skocpol and Schinckler, 2019). Moore’s ideas on Marxist revolutionary thought influenced Theda’s views on class structure and relations (Skocpol, 1979). The Communist Revolution in China and the Nazi Revolution in Germany examined in this chapter will act as case studies for the structural conditions that lay the groundwork for Skocpol’s writings on revolutions.

Defining Social Revolutions

By arguing that the most important revolutionary situations and outcomes completely change society’s fabric, Skocpol holds a view of revolutions different from other theorists in this book. Social revolutions are different from other conflicts in that it changes the social and political fabric of a society in a mutually reinforcing way (Skocpol, 1979, pg. 5). A change in either the social or political structure likely will result in a change in the other. In her own words, Skocpol describes social revolutions as the “rapid, basic transformations of a society’s state and class structure, accompanied and in part carried through by class-based revolts from below” (Skocpol 1979, pg. 287). Skocpol points out social revolutions as uniquely crucial. Revolutionary situations need to be looked at holistically, looking at all groups competing for power in the state. This definition also allows for identifying a complex social event that has happened rarely throughout history. For Skocpol to consider something a social revolution, there needs to be a deliberate and sustainable change in state and class structures. Thus, the realm of the state and class organizations will always be central to revolutions: something that does not result in tangible change in those realms would not qualify as a social revolution (Skocpol, 1979, pg. 5). Given this, the Russian Revolution would be classified as a social revolution because the state and classes’ structure completely changed when the Communist Party took over (DeFronzo, 2011, pg. 55). The American Revolution would not be classified as a social revolution because American life or government did not substantially change; instead, just the British were kicked out. The Virginia House of Burgess that worked under the British royal government still operates today; it is now called the House of Delegates and acts as one of two parts of the Virginia General Assembly (House History, Virginia.gov). The state structures need to be examined to determine how and when class members will organize themselves to engage in a struggle for their interests effectively. Essentially, revolutionary situations develop due to state political crises and class domination. The obstacles in place determine revolutionary outcomes during the revolutionary situation. In addition to this definition, Skocpol also believes that to understand social revolutions; there needs to be an understanding of international and world-historical contexts (Skocpol, 1979, pg. 14).

International Influences on Social Revolutions

Revolutions do not happen in isolation. An event in one part of the world can have drastic impacts on events in another. The interconnectedness of revolutions is seen in the 2011 Arab Spring. A push for democracy in Tunisia quickly spread around the rest of the Arab world ended in mass pro-democracy protests—reflecting many of Skocpol’s ideas regarding international impacts on and of revolutions (Anderson, “Demystifying the Arab Spring”). Skocpol considers the most relevant transnational relations to be the structures of world capitalism and the international state system (Skocpol, 1979, pg. 19). Countries that will experience revolutionary situations likely are the most economically and politically disadvantaged in the world (Skocpol, 1979, pg. 23). One country placing economic sanctions on another can result in a change in policy by the government of the sanctioned state, making life worse for their people—thereby creating the necessary preconditions for a revolutionary situation. Economic sanctions that contributed to a revolutionary situation can be seen in the liberal economic demands called for in Bolivia by the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Many indigenous groups in the nation were outraged by the privatization of government services like gas and water and the unfair burden these structural adjustments placed on indigenous groups. The government action on the IMF demands prompted an indigenous social revolutionary situation that demanded the government act more in line with the Bolivian people’s wants and needs (Webber, 2005). A state with both the will and capacity to withstand domestic and international fluctuations will be less likely to experience a social revolution; thus, a flexible state structure is essential to help a state reduce the likelihood of a revolutionary situation (Skocpol, 1979, pg. 22).

Skocpol also attributes the influence of the international sphere to global capitalism. Capitalism spread unevenly throughout the world, and the transnational economic relations that have since developed have and will always influence national economic developments, according to Skocpol. Capitalism created an international system of competing states that shaped the uneven state development course—leaving some states behind (Skocpol, 1979, pg. 23). Economically disadvantaged states will more likely experience revolutionary situations because of global capitalism disparity.

The Potential Autonomy of the State

Unlike other theorists, Skocpol does not consider a state’s government to be under complete control of the dominant class. Instead, she sees the government’s goal as the preservation of the existing class structure and modes of production as a whole (Skocpol, 1979, pg. 27). In achieving this preservation, she argues that the government may be free from specific control of dominant class groups, so long as it implements policies that serve the dominant class’s fundamental interests (Skocpol, 1979, pg. 27). For example, a state could implement reforms to satisfy a subordinate class so long as, in doing so, it does not undermine the general will and goals of the dominant class. Skocpol’s class struggle reductionism theory holds that state structures are shaped by the class struggle between dominant and subordinate classes and that many social revolutions have been kickstarted by direct contradictions centered in the structure of the old regime (Skocpol, 1979, pg. 28). The state’s ability to withstand a revolutionary situation is mainly dependent on the structure of the state. Even after the loss of legitimacy, a state can remain stable and unmoved by mass revolts if the state’s coercive organizations remain coherent and effective (Skocpol, 1979, pg. 32). The role of state structure demonstrates that the success of a social revolution becomes contingent on the state being too weak to withstand mass revolt. In this sense, Skocpol is most prominently a structuralist when analyzing revolutions.

Social Revolution as a Tree

Perhaps an easy way to think of Skocpol’s theory is to compare social revolutions to a tree. Throughout the year, a tree changes as the seasons change – some especially dramatic such as when the leaves fall off in the fall. These changes are analogous to a reform effort by a government. The appearance will change, but the foundational aspects of the tree (and for the purposes of this analogy, the government, and society) are still present. However, once the tree gets chopped down and turned into something completely different, like a wooden rocking chair, the tree’s foundation changes entirely. The critical foundational change would be what Skocpol describes as a social revolution. Completely changing the foundations of a government and society is the only thing that constitutes a social revolution. Those little changes that alter a government’s appearance, like leaves falling off a tree, are not all that consequential, and only chopping down the tree should garner attention.

Skocpol’s theory of revolution is a new lens for examining revolutionary situations and outcomes. Skocpol asserts that revolutions are shaped and even caused by international politics and events around the world. Skocpol pioneered the idea that the most important revolutions, the ones worth looking closely at, completely change society’s fabric. For her innovative work, Skocpol won the Johan Skytte Prize in political science (“Johan Skytte Prize,” 2020). In an ever-increasing globalized world, where one can see cause and effect more clearly from one state to another, Theda Skocpol laid out a roadmap for what to look for in a revolutionary situation to determine its overall outcome. Skocpol’s road map becomes particularly useful in examining two case studies: the Chinese Communist Revolution and the Nazi Revolution. At first glance, one might question why the Nazi takeover is considered a revolution without the civil unrest in the streets that so often characterizes revolution. Skocpol cares about the complete overhaul and changing of the government to constitute a revolution. The transformation of a democratic Weimar Republic to a fascist dictatorship illustrates the complete overhaul of government.

The Chinese Communist Revolution

The Chinese Communist Revolution embodies Theda Skocpol’s social revolutionary theory by illustrating a revolutionary situation, a crisis of state, and a revolutionary outcome that alters the nation’s political and social structure. The revolutionary situation began with the Qing Dynasty’s disintegration wherein, warlords controlled most of the Emperor’s former territories. High taxation and the peasant class’s exploitation by the warlords fueled discontent, furthering the revolutionary fervor. The Communist and Nationalist parties utilized discontent from peasant, middle, and elite classes, initiating a political dominance struggle. Civil War broke out, beginning a state exacerbated the crisis by international forces in the form of a Japanese invasion (Brown, 2008). The crisis of state diminished after the Communist party garnered enough peasant support to declare a government in the name of the people. Effectively overcoming the obstacle of popular support, a determination necessary in defining the revolutionary outcome and causing a massive overhaul of the former regime (Skocpol, 1979). This revolutionary situation forever changed China’s political and social structure (Office of the Historian, 2018).

Beginning with the Qing Dynasty’s disintegration, the opportunity for political change arose. Nationalist Kuomintang Party (KMT) forces immediately seized power under Dr. Sun Yat-Sen’s leadership. By the autumn of 1911, Dr. Sun’s revolutionary coalition deposed the Emperor and declared the Republic of China (Office of Historian, 2018). However, by the end of 1911, China remained a mainly agrarian society. Under the agrarian system, the Nationalist coalition retained few resources to unify China. The Republic of China inherited a social system that lacked the structural means necessary to be a prosperous state. Due to resource scarcity, China was slow to reform and alienated most laborer and peasant classes (Brown, 2008). Additionally, warlords in the northern territories maintained control over the peasant class. The warlord elite class exploited the lower class through high taxation. The lack of structural conduciveness coupled with high taxation left most of the population in discontent and deprivation, pushing the masses toward radicalization and mass mobilization. Radicalization and mobilization illustrate Skocpol’s theory by provoking a revolutionary situation wherein a lack of government unification allows multiple actors to seize power. Failed states give social and political restructuring opportunities by providing the critical situation for change (Brown, 2008).

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) utilized discontent and disorganization in the Republican government to delegitimize the KMT. In doing so, the CCP created a partisan split culminating at the beginning of a Civil War. By the beginning of the Civil War, the Nationalists’ support had diminished among the peasant class who began looking to the Communist Party for agrarian reform and industrialization (Skocpol, 1979). This paradigm shift illustrates an obstacle for both the Communist and Nationalist parties, the ability to coerce the masses into subordination to maintain power (Brown, 2008). The social revolutionary theory holds that revolutionary outcomes are determined by obstacles in the organization of classes (Skocpol, 1979). That obstacle being either actors’ ability to coerce then mobilize China’s massive peasant and lower-class population alienated from the political system by years of oppressive feudal rule. The obstacle of popular support reinforces Skocpol’s argument by implying that an effective class organization is a determinant factor in defining the revolutionary outcome (Skocpol, 1979: p. 14).

After 1937, Japan’s invasion interrupted the Civil War, causing detrimental harm to urban centers where the Nationalists party drew most of its support from upper and middle-class Chinese citizens, undermining popular support for the KMT. The Japanese invasion enlarged the support base for the CCP among the poor and rural areas due to their ability to mobilize the peasant class under their promises of reform (Brown, 2008). Exemplifying Skocpol’s theory, the Japanese invasion and the Chinese Civil War created a state crisis, initiating movement of the majority peasant class and the remaining elite class toward the Communist party (Skocpol, 1979). The peasant class and the remaining elite class’s movement toward the Communist party would crystallize with the Civil War’s re-ignition following the end of WWII. Mass-mobilization of loyal peasantry gave the Communist Party resources and manpower that the KMT lost during the Japanese occupation. After the occupation, the now quasi-military government of the Nationalist Party became corrupt and ineffective due to the lack of an appropriate support base (Brown, 2008). Between 1947 and 1949, Mao Zedong assumed command of the Communist forces. During this time, the Communist party accumulated a massive stockpile of weapons taken from the retreating Japanese. With the addition of grassroots support from the rural peasantry, by 1949, the CCP shifted the tide of the Civil War in their favor. After a string of victories, Mao Zedong—the leader of the CCP at the time— declared the People’s Republic of China (Office of the Historian, 2018).

Mao Zedong utilized his popular support to establish a social revolution. The Chinese Communist Party rebuilt Chinese society from the ground up. The CCP reformed agrarian society, industrialized rapidly, bringing their rural peasant supporters to the forefront of economic development and political discussion (Brown, 2008). The transition from a mainly agrarian to an industrialized society illustrates Skocpol’s idea of a revolutionary outcome. The Chinese Communist movement overcame the obstacle of maintaining popular support of the peasant masses and delegitimizing their nationalist counterparts through comparison to the weak imperial regime. As stated by Theda Skocpol herself, “Successful Revolution accomplishes the resynchronization of the social system’s values and environment that… old regime authorities were unable to do” (Skocpol, 1979: p. 12). In China, the social system’s resynchronization refers to the agrarian reform, industrialization, and opportunity for participation the CCP enabled. Overall, The CCP mobilized the peasant class in China, changing Chinese Society for years to come (Office of the Historian, 2018).

An alternative to Skocpol’s structural explanation of the Chinese Revolution is Chalmers Johnson’s revolutionary equation. Johnson highlights the importance of an x-factor or “spark” in launching a revolution (Johnson, 1966). In the context of the Chinese Revolution, Johnson’s x-factor refers to the military organization and popular appeal of Mao Zedong, the Chinese Communist Party leader, as the prime determinant for the outcome of the revolution. The argument’s basis holds that mitigating these factors would result in an antipodal conclusion to the Chinese Communist Revolution. The next chapter merges actor-oriented and structural theories under Chalmers Johnson’s theory to uncover the x-factor, which is pivotal in understanding revolutionary outcomes.

Nazi Revolution in Germany

The Nazi Revolution taking place in Germany following the Great Depression exhibits the necessary structural international conditions sufficient for revolutions to occur, according to Skocpol. After World War I, Germany was left devastated. The Weimar Republic found itself in a bad state that showed rapid deterioration due to the signing of the Treaty of Versailles. The Treaty of Versailles decimated Germany’s entire economy and weakened the political system, ultimately culminating in Hitler’s rise to power. Beginning with the Beer Hall Putsch in 1923, this failed coup d’état in Bavaria hinted that a revolutionary situation might occur. Hitler led the Beer Hall Putsch and, after being convicted of treason, “…served barely eight and a half months of a five-year sentence” (King, 2018). Hitler’s menial amount of time in jail could be attributed to mass corruption within the Weimar Republic’s political system. At the time, it was commonplace for the Communists to be targeted and persecuted heavily, whereas those that allied with the Nazi party were treated as much less of a threat. Because of the lack of punishment inherent in the Weimar Republic’s system, Hitler used those nine months in jail to pen Mein Kampf (Bergen, 2003, p. 51). Through his writings, Hitler gained even more supporters, furthering the growth of the Nazi party. By the early 1930s, the Nazi party grew large enough to hold nearly 200 seats in the German parliament, all while remaining powerless. At this point, Hitler felt that the Nazi party had climaxed, growing as large as it ever would, causing him to contemplate suicide. Then, in 1933, President Paul von Hindenburg appointed Hitler, Germany’s chancellor. Article 48, previously enacted by President Hindenburg, eventually allowed Hitler to rule by decree (Bergen, 2003, p. 66-67). Hitler used his power as chancellor to ban all opposing political parties whose views did not align with those of the Nazi party. Additionally, Hitler enacted the Reichstag Fire Decree and the Enabling Act, paving the way for the Nazi party to gain full power in Germany without outright violence toward the incumbent government (Bergen, 2003, p. 71-72).

The mostly corrupt, as well as economically and politically deteriorated Weimar Republic came to a point where its failures allowed for a revolutionary situation to occur. It started first with a political overhaul. Just weeks after Hitler’s chancellorship appointment, the aforementioned Reichstag Fire Decree was enacted. The decree revoked many civil liberties of Germans, justifying the imprisonment of anyone who opposed the Nazi party. The decree’s main target was the communists because they held the second-largest number of seats in the German parliament. In 1934 President Hindenburg died, creating a clear path for Hitler to morph his chancellorship and the newly opened presidency into one. Next came the social overhaul, wherein mass persecution of groups of people occurred, including but not limited to Jewish communities, gay men, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and the Roma. The most infamous form of persecution that any of these groups faced before systematic genocide occurred was the Nuremberg Laws’ passing. They aimed to separate Jews from the ‘Aryan’ Germans. A later portion of the laws stated that an individual need not be Jewish to be stripped of the rights associated with their German citizenship, instead “People with three or more grandparents of the Jewish faith counted as Jews” (Bergen, 2003, p. 74). These sudden and drastic changes allowed Germany’s Nazi Revolution to be classified under Skocpol’s theory of social revolution. The entire social system structure crumbled and grew back as Nazi Germany. A state that looked and functioned differently from the progressive Weimar Republic. The structural conditions included weakened institutions and rampant corruption in the Weimar Republic. These conditions became the perfect recipe for a third party’s structural conduciveness to come in and take over. In the case of the Nazis, they capitalized on these conditions. The government rapidly moved from the progressive, democratically run Weimar Republic, to the extreme nationalist dictatorial Nazi regime.

Skocpol has a structurally oriented approach to analyzing revolutions. Opponents to her theory may say because of her rigid structural lens; she missed important ideas posed by action-oriented theorists, like Chalmers Johnson or Ted Gurr. One of the particularly applicable theories she left out was the Great Man theory, which claims that Great leaders are born possessing traits that enable them to rise and lead on instinct. Great leaders arise when needed most. Many theorists like to use this theory to explain Hitler’s rise to power. Where the ideas collide is that when looking at the Nazi revolution through Skocpol’s structural lens, the Nazi revolution can be attributed to much more than just Hitler. However, when looking through an actor-oriented lens, it becomes more focused on how it was Hitler’s rise to power. Great Man theory is indeed well rounded enough to explain the significance of Hitler’s role in the Nazi Revolution. Many will argue, however, that Hitler would not have been able to accomplish this feat alone, and without his inner circle of men like Himmler, Göring, and Goebbels, he would not have been able to accomplish what he did (Bergen, 2003, p. 74). Accurate as that may be, it does not nullify his classification under the Great Man theory because he was still the foremost actor in the movement and played a large role in executing the revolution.

Conclusion

Theda Skocpol maintains that revolutions are rare. Social revolutions change both state institutions and state structure. This change will be carried out with purposive action by class-based revolts from below. Social revolutions have both a substantive national and international impact. Going a step beyond her mentor Barrington Moore and other revolutionary theorists before her, Skocpol articulates an exciting aspect to revolutionary situations and outcomes—an international lens. The Chinese Communist revolution’s case study exhibits the complete overhaul of a governmental system through peasant mobilization and the surrounding world conditions that made its outcome possible. Similarly, the Nazi Revolution in Germany details how the structural conditions of a government unable to respond to its people’s needs after an international affair like World War I predetermines a revolutionary outcome. Skocpol articulated a new way to look at revolutionary theory, one that will be important going forward in a globalized, interdependent world.

While Skocpol’s theory is a sufficient theory for explaining the structural causes of revolution, she does not include the actor-oriented sides of a revolution. Skocpol misses the ‘spark’ that organizes people against their state’s structural issues. This fault can be seen in Skocpol’s failure to account for the roles that Mao and Hitler played in their respective revolutions. The Great Man theory highlights the importance of a person in a revolution. However, whether it genuinely be that Hitler was a “Great Man” or that it was merely the Weimar Republic’s failures that allowed the Nazis to rise to power is still up for interpretation. Hitler’s role as an individual in the Nazi uprising is clearly something that Skocpol would have overlooked due to her structural focus. Chalmers Johnson refers to an x-factor or “spark” as a determinant in the revolutionary outcome. Under this theory, Mao represents the x-factor in provoking the Chinese revolution and ensuring its outcome. It can be argued that the absence of Mao’s military organization and popular appeal would alter the outcome of the Chinese Revolution. In the next chapter, Chalmers Johnson delves further into the idea of an ‘x-factor’ that starts a revolution. The ‘x-factor’ has explanatory power when thinking about revolutionary situations and their ultimate outcomes. Chalmers Johnson will explore and bridge structural and actor-oriented theories to connect some pieces of the puzzle this book has examined thus far.

Works Cited

Anderson, Lisa. “Demystifying the Arab Spring.” Foreign Affairs, May/June 2011. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/libya/2011-04-03/demystifying-arab-spring

Bergen, Doris L. War and Genocide. United Kingdom: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003.

DeFronzo, James, Revolutions and Revolutionary Movements, 4th ED., Chapter 2 (Westview Press, 2011).

Johnson, Chalmers. Revolutionary Change. Little Brown & Company, 1966.

“Johan Skytte Prize.” The Johan Skytte Prize, 2020, www.skytteprize.com/.

King, David. The Trial of Adolf Hitler: The Beer Hall Putsch and the Rise of Nazi Germany. New York: Norton & Company, 2018.

Levere, Douglas. Harvard political scientist Theda Skocpol delivers the keynote address for UB’s “Critical Conversations.” 2016. Photograph. http://www.buffalo.edu/ubnow/stories/2016/11/skocpol-critical-conversation.html

Office of the Historian, Foreign Service Institute, ed. “The Chinese Revolution of 1911 and 1949.” Office of the Historian. https://history.state.gov/milestones/1899-1913/chinese-rev.

Skocpol, Theda, and Eric Schickler. “A Conversation with Theda Skocpol.” Annual Reviews, May 2019. https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/10.1146/annurev-polisci-030816-105449.

Skocpol, Theda. “Skocpol: States and Social Revolutions.” Adam R Brown. Last modified 1979. Accessed November 8, 2020. https://adambrown.info/p/notes/skocpol_states_and_social_revolutions.

Theda Skocpol, States and Social Revolutions (Cambridge University Press, 1979).

Wallace, Willard. “American Revolution” Encyclopedia Britannica, Last Accessed December 1, 2020. https://www.britannica.com/event/American-Revolution

Webber, Jeffrey R. “Left-Indigenous Struggles in Bolivia: Searching for Revolutionary Democracy” Monthly Review, September 01, 2005.

Virginia Government. “House History.” Last accessed December 3, 2020. https://history.house.virginia.gov/home

Image Attribution

“RS3J5999” by Miller Center is licensed under CC BY 2.0