{"title":"超越世代思考:论革命理论的未来","authors":"C. Beck, Daniel P. Ritter","doi":"10.31235/osf.io/mq4rw","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A recent exchange between Allinson (2019) and Abrams (2019) on the current state of revolution theory rests on the assumption that the generational, backward-looking view of revolution studies is also a fruitful way of thinking of the field’s present and future. We argue, in contrast, that while a generational approach has important benefits, it also contains shortcomings that may lead the future of revolution studies in less fruitful directions. We examine where an overreliance on generational thinking has led us, and provide an exploratory sketch of how we can begin to move beyond generational thinking and imagine a new future for the study of revolution.","PeriodicalId":46194,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Historical Sociology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Thinking Beyond Generations: On the Future of Revolution Theory\",\"authors\":\"C. Beck, Daniel P. Ritter\",\"doi\":\"10.31235/osf.io/mq4rw\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A recent exchange between Allinson (2019) and Abrams (2019) on the current state of revolution theory rests on the assumption that the generational, backward-looking view of revolution studies is also a fruitful way of thinking of the field’s present and future. We argue, in contrast, that while a generational approach has important benefits, it also contains shortcomings that may lead the future of revolution studies in less fruitful directions. We examine where an overreliance on generational thinking has led us, and provide an exploratory sketch of how we can begin to move beyond generational thinking and imagine a new future for the study of revolution.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46194,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Historical Sociology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-11-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Historical Sociology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/mq4rw\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Historical Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/mq4rw","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Thinking Beyond Generations: On the Future of Revolution Theory
A recent exchange between Allinson (2019) and Abrams (2019) on the current state of revolution theory rests on the assumption that the generational, backward-looking view of revolution studies is also a fruitful way of thinking of the field’s present and future. We argue, in contrast, that while a generational approach has important benefits, it also contains shortcomings that may lead the future of revolution studies in less fruitful directions. We examine where an overreliance on generational thinking has led us, and provide an exploratory sketch of how we can begin to move beyond generational thinking and imagine a new future for the study of revolution.
期刊介绍:
Edited by a distinguished international panel of historians, anthropologists, geographers and sociologists, the Journal of Historical Sociology is both interdisciplinary in approach and innovative in content. As well as refereed articles, the journal presents review essays and commentary in its Issues and Agendas section, and aims to provoke discussion and debate.