Between Quiescence and Rebellion Among the Peasantry

Leslie Anderson

Journal of Theoretical Politics, 1997, vol. 9, issue 4, 503-532

Abstract: This essay is a theoretical and empirical test of two major theories of peasant political action, James Scott's Moral Economy of the Peasant and Samuel Popkin's The Rational Peasant. The essay draws primarily upon testimony taken from peasant activists involved in a wide range of different forms of political action. The essay goes on to operationalize core elements from each of these two theories and to compare them statistically to determine which is stronger in explaining different types of peasant political action. The qualitative and quantitative findings show that Scott's theory is stronger when explaining choices of extreme action such as rebellion whereas Popkin's theory is primarily important with respect to tactics of collective nonviolence. Both theories and both kinds of motivation are needed to provide an explanation for the full range of possible peasant political actions. The conclusion points toward a need for a more comprehensive and inclusive theory of political motivation incorporating both self-interested and community-oriented types of motivation.

Keywords: Central America; collective action; crucial case tests; peasant politics; rebellion (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 1997
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0951692897009004004 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:jothpo:v:9:y:1997:i:4:p:503-532

DOI: 10.1177/0951692897009004004

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Theoretical Politics
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().