Mark I. Lichbach – författare

Social order results from a complex interaction of individual actions, institutional structures, and cultural norms. But just how do they relate to one another, and is any one factor predominant? The answers that social science has provided reflect the competing paradigms of the rationalist, structuralist, and culturalist approaches.In this innovative book, two prominent social scientists coming from competing research traditions attempt to chart a course between them, drawing on their respective strengths to present a new model based on a classificatory scheme of market/community/contract/hierarchy. The discussion, which includes a closing dialogue between the authors, covers both methodological and empirical issues, with a review of classic theories of revolution and an analysis of the process of relegitimation following the French Revolution and the Dutch Revolt against the Hapsburgs.

Advocates of rational choice theory in political science have been perceived by their critics as attempting to establish an intellectual hegemony in contemporary social science, to the detriment of alternative methods of research. The debate has gained a nonacademic audience, hitting the pages of the New York Times and the New Republic. In the academy, the antagonists have expressed their views in books, journal articles, and at professional conferences. Mark I. Lichbach addresses the question of the place of rational choice theory in the social sciences in general and in political science in particular. He presents a typology of the antagonists as either rationalist, culturalist, or structuralist and offers an insightful examination of the debate. He reveals that the rationalist bid for hegemony and synthesis is rooted in the weaknesses, not the strengths, of rationalist thought. He concludes that the various theoretical camps are unlikely to accept the claimed superiority of the rationalist approach but that this opposition is of value in itself to the social sciences, which requires multiple perspectives to remain healthy. With its penetrating examination of the assumptions and basic arguments of each of the sides to this debate, this book cuts through the partisan rhetoric and provides an essential roadmap for the future of the discipline. Mark I. Lichbach is Professor of Government and Politics, University of Maryland.

Since the mid 1960s, theorists have elaborated over two dozen different solutions to the collection action problem. During much of this same period, students of conflict have explored many questions about protest and rebellion. The Rebel's Dilemma examines what happens when one brings the full richness of collective action theories to bear on the many complex problems of collective dissent.". . . a significant contribution to the understanding of collective behavior, protest, and rebellion." --Choice"The book is interesting and thought-provoking, and its insights extend beyond the narrow subject of rebellion to help illuminate many issues related to organizing groups to undertake collective action." --Public Choice"[Lichbach's] book is monumental and pivotal. . . . [It] consolidates over three decades of research on collective action problems and sets the agenda for future studies of collective dissent and rebellion. . . . [This] book is a major step forward. It will have an enormous impact in the field of conflict studies and belongs on the shelf of anyone even casually interested in dissent, rebellion, and revolution. . . . [This] book is a major step forward. It will have an enormous impact in the field of conflict studies and belongs on the shelf of anyone even casually interested in dissent, rebellion, and revolution." --American Political Science Review"For scholars interested in game-theoretic analyses of politics . . . essential reading." --Manus I. Midlarsky, Journal of Politics"Lichbach has to be praised for providing valuable insight on the logic of collective dissent. . . ." --Political StudiesMark Irving Lichbach is Professor of Political Science, University of Colorado.

Barrington Moore bequeathed comparativists a problem: how to reconcile his causal claim of 'no bourgeoisie, no democracy' with his normative 'dream of a free and rational society'. Lichbach harmonizes causal methodology and normative democratic theory, illustrating their interrelationship. Using a dialogue among four specific texts, Lichbach advances five constructive themes. First, comparativists should study the causal agency of individuals, groups and democracies. Second, three types of collective agency should be paired with an exploration of three corresponding moral dilemmas: ought-is, freedom-power and democracy-causality. Third, at the center of inquiry, comparativists should place big-P Paradigms and big-M Methodology. Fourth, as they play with research schools, creatively combining prescriptive and descriptive approaches to democratization, they should encourage a mixed-theory and mixed-method field. Finally, comparativists should study pragmatic questions about political power and democratic performance: in building a democratic state, which democracy, under which conditions, is best, and how might it be achieved?

Barrington Moore bequeathed comparativists a problem: how to reconcile his causal claim of 'no bourgeoisie, no democracy' with his normative 'dream of a free and rational society'. Lichbach harmonizes causal methodology and normative democratic theory, illustrating their interrelationship. Using a dialogue among four specific texts, Lichbach advances five constructive themes. First, comparativists should study the causal agency of individuals, groups and democracies. Second, three types of collective agency should be paired with an exploration of three corresponding moral dilemmas: ought-is, freedom-power and democracy-causality. Third, at the center of inquiry, comparativists should place big-P Paradigms and big-M Methodology. Fourth, as they play with research schools, creatively combining prescriptive and descriptive approaches to democratization, they should encourage a mixed-theory and mixed-method field. Finally, comparativists should study pragmatic questions about political power and democratic performance: in building a democratic state, which democracy, under which conditions, is best, and how might it be achieved?

This volume evaluates the state of the art in conflict studies. Original chapters by leading scholars survey theoretical and empirical research on the origins, processes, patterns, and consequences of most forms and contexts of political conflict, protest, repression, and rebellion. Contributors examine key pillars of conflict studies, including civil war, religious conflict, ethnic conflict, transnational conflict, terrorism, revolution, genocide, climate change, and several investigations into the role of the state. The research questions guiding the text include inquiries into the interactions between the rulers and the ruled, authorities and challengers, cooperation and conflict, accommodation and resistance, and the changing context of conflict from the local to the global.

This volume evaluates the state of the art in conflict studies. Original chapters by leading scholars survey theoretical and empirical research on the origins, processes, patterns, and consequences of most forms and contexts of political conflict, protest, repression, and rebellion. Contributors examine key pillars of conflict studies, including civil war, religious conflict, ethnic conflict, transnational conflict, terrorism, revolution, genocide, climate change, and several investigations into the role of the state. The research questions guiding the text include inquiries into the interactions between the rulers and the ruled, authorities and challengers, cooperation and conflict, accommodation and resistance, and the changing context of conflict from the local to the global.