Low-capacity nondemocratic regimes tolerate wide contentious claim-making.

Evidence

Low-capacity, nondemocratic regimes tolerate a relatively wide range of contentious claim-making for three reasons: (1) they lack the means to prescribe many performances, and therefore settle for tribute, ritual obeisance, and a few other services from subjects; (2) they also lack the means to police small-scale contentious claim-making throughout their nominal jurisdictions; (3) their efforts to impose cultural, political, and organizational uniformity throughout their jurisdictions remain weak and ineffectual, with the consequence that actions, emergence processes, and trajectories of contentious politics vary greatly from region to region and sector to sector. — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 448

Categorization

• DEFINE: Completes one cell of Tilly’s capacity-democracy matrix: the causal logic for why low capacity broadens tolerated contention in a nondemocratic regime.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 448
• XREF: connects to: High-capacity authoritarian regimes confine claim-making to state limits or surveilled niches — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 427; Higher regime capacity with some democratic freedoms produces intermediate contention — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 503; Regimes shape claim-making repertoires through control, constitution of claimants, and issue streams — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 1168 (+7 more)

Broader Connections

• High-capacity authoritarian regimes confine claim-making to state limits or surveilled niches #corroborates (0.88) — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 427
• Higher regime capacity with some democratic freedoms produces intermediate contention #expands (0.86) — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 503
• Regime capacity and democracy jointly shape prevailing contentious repertoires. #expands (0.85) — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 533
• A system tolerates and rewards dissent that stays within its boundaries #expands (0.80) — Wael Hallaq, Restating Orientalism, 340
• Regime narrowing of tolerated nonviolent performances channels claimants toward violence and invites state force #qualifies (0.80) — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 744
• Regimes shape claim-making repertoires through control, constitution of claimants, and issue streams #expands (0.78) — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 1168
• Democratic regimes channel contentious claims into prescribed institutional forms. #corroborates (0.75) — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 447
• Totalitarian regimes legitimize eliminating opposition as unnecessary and weak #qualifies (0.73)
• Opposition can contest means without rejecting a regime’s ends #qualifies (0.72)