Contentious politics analysis must steer between abstraction and particularity

Evidence

How can we possibly discipline descriptions of contentious politics? How can we avoid the two tempting but destructive extremes: sum up all sorts of contention into something abstract like “turbulence,” “conflict,” or “disorder,” thereby losing all sense of connections with the political context; or describe each episode in all its particularity, thereby making comparison among places, times, and regimes impossible. We must find a middle ground. — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 288

Categorization

  • corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 288
  • XREF: connects to: The correspondence model reduces political analysis to automatic schema-building — Stuart Hall, Essential Essays, Volume 2: Identity…, 139; Contingency of historical conjunctures is a precondition for political possibility; The scope of political analysis determines whether change seems possible — Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks, 730 (+5 more)

Broader Connections