Rising state capacity raises revolution’s stakes and social impact while lowering its odds.

Evidence

In the case of Europe, the overall rise of governmental capacity profoundly transformed the prospects for revolutionary outcomes. Rising capacity meant that the stakes of revolution increased; it became less and less likely that a revolutionary coalition would walk away from an unsuccessful bid for power retaining control of its own region or segment of government. It reduced the frequency with which the very revolutionary seizure of power would fragment that power into partly autonomous segments, only some of them under command of the putative revolutionaries. But it also greatly increased the social impact of any revolutionary outcome that actually did occur. In the hands of Lenin and Trotsky, even the ramshackle apparatus of the Russian imperial state became an instrument of fundamental social transformation. — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 1067

Categorization

• recurring: this claim recurs 2 times within its source
• XREF: connects to: Revolutions are defined by rapid drastic shifts in capacity or democracy — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 426; High capacity and democracy suppress revolutionary situations while medium-capacity regimes favor outcomes — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 979; Structureless populations make revolutions easy to win but hard to secure (+3 more)

Broader Connections

• High capacity and democracy suppress revolutionary situations while medium-capacity regimes favor outcomes #corroborates (0.85) — Charles Tilly, Regimes and Repertoires, 979
• Structureless populations make revolutions easy to win but hard to secure #complicates (0.72)