Postwar revolutionary success depended heavily on regimes’ international connections.

Evidence

For the postwar period outside of Europe, nevertheless, some general principles seem to hold. Most notably, the international connections of regimes have played even more potent parts in the success or failure of revolutionary bids for power than they did before World War II. Revolutionary success has always depended on the ability of dissidents to amass coercive force, overcome the regime’s coercive force, and use force to take over governmental organization. Defection of regime members has always facilitated these moves. — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 1089

Categorization

• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 1089
• XREF: connects to: International revolutionary models and support make revolutionary situations more frequent — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 1065; Revolutionary problems transcend national boundaries and require international coordination; Revolutionary renewal depends on a country’s internal and international force relations (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• Anti-colonial revolutions depended on Soviet material and diplomatic support #exemplifies (0.92) — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory, 149
• Revolutionary renewal depends on a country’s internal and international force relations #corroborates (0.85)
• Revolutionary problems transcend national boundaries and require international coordination #expands (0.78)
• Postwar revolutions genuinely occurred across Asia, Africa, and the Americas. #qualifies (0.72)