2020/04/13 by Juan Masullo · 74 citations
Psychology · Social Sciences · #Argument (complex analysis) #Civil disobedience #Collective action #Criminology #Dissent #Ideology #Law #Normative #Opposition (politics) #Peacebuilding and International Security #Political Conflict and Governance #Political economy #Political science #Politics #Psychology #Scholarship #Social psychology #Sociology #Spanish Civil War #Terrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
paper · pdf · doi:10.1177/0010414020912285
published in Comparative Political Studies 54(10), 1849-1884 (SAGE Publishing)
openalex publication_date 2020/04/13 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/25
Why do some communities overtly declare their opposition to violent groups, while others disguise it by engaging in seemingly unrelated activities? Why do some communities manifest their dissent using nonviolent methods instead of organizing violence of their own? I argue that ideational factors are crucial to answering these questions: normative commitments can restrict civilian contention to nonviolent forms of action, while exposure to oppositional ideologies can push civilians toward more confrontational forms of noncooperation with armed groups. Furthermore, I contend that the role of political entrepreneurs activating and mobilizing this ideational content is crucial for it to shape contention. I support this argument with a wealth of microlevel evidence collected in various warzones in Colombia, analyzed within a purposively designed comparative structure. My findings support the growing conflict scholarship that stresses that ideology matters in war, but extends its application beyond armed actors’ behavior to that of civilian communities.