Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of Figures and Tables
- Preface and Acknowledgments
- 1 CODICIL TO A PATRIOT PROFILE
- 2 PATRIOTS, POLITICAL PROCESS, AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS
- 3 THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF PATRIOT INSURGENCY
- 4 THE FARM CRISIS, THREAT ATTRIBUTION, AND PATRIOT MOBILIZATION
- 5 STATE MOBILIZATION: BUILDING A TRAJECTORY OF CONTENTION
- 6 THE GUN RIGHTS NETWORK AND NASCENT PATRIOTS: RISE OF A THREAT SPIRAL
- 7 MOVEMENT-STATE ATTRIBUTIONS OF WAR: RUBY RIDGE AND WACO
- 8 PATRIOT INSURGENCY AND THE OKLAHOMA CITY BOMBING
- 9 AFTER OKLAHOMA CITY: PATRIOT DEMOBILIZATION AND DECLINE
- References
- Index
5 - STATE MOBILIZATION: BUILDING A TRAJECTORY OF CONTENTION
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2012
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of Figures and Tables
- Preface and Acknowledgments
- 1 CODICIL TO A PATRIOT PROFILE
- 2 PATRIOTS, POLITICAL PROCESS, AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS
- 3 THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF PATRIOT INSURGENCY
- 4 THE FARM CRISIS, THREAT ATTRIBUTION, AND PATRIOT MOBILIZATION
- 5 STATE MOBILIZATION: BUILDING A TRAJECTORY OF CONTENTION
- 6 THE GUN RIGHTS NETWORK AND NASCENT PATRIOTS: RISE OF A THREAT SPIRAL
- 7 MOVEMENT-STATE ATTRIBUTIONS OF WAR: RUBY RIDGE AND WACO
- 8 PATRIOT INSURGENCY AND THE OKLAHOMA CITY BOMBING
- 9 AFTER OKLAHOMA CITY: PATRIOT DEMOBILIZATION AND DECLINE
- References
- Index
Summary
States and challengers engage in continuous and recursive interaction. As McAdam (1999: xxvi) observes, what comes to be defined as a threat by challengers is itself a by-product of innovative collective action by state actors designed to counter perceived threats to the realization of their interests. If and when state actions are defined as new threats by challenging groups, responsive episodes of insurgent collective action are likely to ensue, setting the stage for yet another round of state actions in an iterative dance of stimulus and response. In this manner, state actors and challengers may create a reciprocal, interlocking helix of escalating conflict that shapes and builds the trajectory of contention. “Each [state and challenging group] defines threats and opportunities, mobilizes existent and newly created resources, undertakes innovative collective action in response to other actors' maneuvers, and in some cases transforms the course of interaction” (McAdam, Tarrow, and Tilly, 2001: 74).
A major challenge facing social movement scholars is explaining how and why relations among actors and predominant forms of interaction shift significantly in the course of contention. We have already noted McAdam's call for a less movement-centric account of contentious politics. The corollary of this critique is that the dynamic role played by the state has not been fully appreciated in social movement studies: “To the extent that it enters at all, the state generally acts as a diabolus ex machina, producing opportunities, awaiting mobilization, landing heavily on some actors and facilitating others, but not participating directly in contention” (McAdam, Tarrow, and Tilly, 2001: 74).
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Patriots, Politics, and the Oklahoma City Bombing , pp. 97 - 113Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2007