Low-coordination scattered violence can cause more damage than organized violence

Evidence

Let us be clear what the scheme does and does not represent. It does not summarize the conditions under which violent contention occurs rarely or frequently. We have no reason whatsoever to imagine that highsalience/low-coordination events form a smaller share of all collective violence than do high-salience/high-coordination events, or that lowsalience/low-coordination events usually produce less violence than the rest. Scattered attacks can wreak havoc across an entire region, while high-salience/high-coordination collective violence sometimes involves no more than ritual wrecking of a fallen leader’s statue. — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 733

Categorization

  • XREF: Supporting caution for the reader’s hypothesis-testing: the mere form of violence (its coordination level) does not predict its severity — an important warning if extending the framework to measure how regimes absorb or defuse politicization. — connects to: Total-damage measures of violence cannot explain regime-violence interactions — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 719; Destructiveness rises with both damage salience and coordination — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 726; Violence is mapped by damage salience and actor coordination — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 724 (+6 more)
  • corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 733

Broader Connections