Unraveling the Radical Flank Effect: The Role of Moderate Organizations in the Face of Radical Flank Violence

Abstract

Why do moderate social movement organizations sometimes benefit from or avoid the negative effects of radical flank violence, while in other cases, they suffer strategic setbacks due to such extremism? Scholars have diverged in their conclusions regarding the impact of radical flank actions on more moderate organizations, a phenomenon known as the Radical Flank Effect (RFE). Some argue that radical elements within a movement can inadvertently boost the credibility and support for moderate groups by offering a contrast. Others believe that violence can tarnish the movement’s overall image as extremist, negatively impacting moderates. I propose that these varying conclusions stem partly from a lack of focus on the agency of moderate organizations in managing the extent to which radical factions harm their core interests. Examining the emergence of radical flank violence in the Quebec pro-independence movement during the 1960s and 1970s, this study investigates how and when moderates might enhance their distinction from radical elements and avoid detrimental associations. Relying on in-depth interviews with moderate leaders and archival research, the findings reveal that moderates can achieve this by publicly denouncing violence, avoiding interactions with radicals, and signal to state authorities intent to de-escalate the conflict.