Contentious political categories like riot are symbolically but not causally coherent.

Evidence

Given the importance of the second and third types of statements, we must distinguish between two kinds of coherence: causal and symbolic. Causal coherence refers to the systematic cause-and-effect properties of a phenomenon. Symbolic coherence singles out the extent to which participants or observers of a phenomenon attribute to it unity and significance. I have already claimed that both regimes and repertoires qualify as causally coherent phenomena. I have written this book, indeed, to identify the systematic causal properties of regimes and repertoires. But I have just denied that riots, as such, constitute causally coherent phenomena. In terms of the distinction between types of coherence, however, riots qualify as symbolically coherent phenomena, at least in the context of eighteenth-century Britain. I will make similar claims concerning revolutions, social movements, and many other forms of contentious politics— symbolically, but not causally, coherent. — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 301

Categorization

• DEFINE: Defines the causal-versus-symbolic coherence distinction that anchors Tilly’s whole analytic approach.
• XREF: Crucial for the reader’s extension project: if ‘riot’ and ‘terror’ are only symbolically coherent, then states can exploit that symbolic coherence asymmetrically — labeling subordinate-group acts as symbolically-unified ‘terror’ while treating dominant-group acts as causally diverse — which is precisely the asymmetry under test. — connects to: Ideological labels carry symbolic rather than issue-based meaning for the public.; Calling an event ‘riot’ or ‘revolution’ is itself a consequential claim; Political symbols either unify or divide depending on their object — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1997 (+1 more)
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 301

Broader Connections

• Calling an event ‘riot’ or ‘revolution’ is itself a consequential claim #expands (0.82)
• Ideological labels carry symbolic rather than issue-based meaning for the public. #corroborates (0.78)
• Ideological categories are not bipolar but require structurally distinct explanatory determinants. #expands (0.76) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2047
• Political symbols either unify or divide depending on their object #qualifies (0.74) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1997