Traugott’s Organizational Hypothesis In his book, Armies of the Poor, Mark Traugott looks at the revolution in France from February 1848 to June 1848. Traugott’s goal is to explain his organizational hypothesis reasoning behind the Revolution of 1848. Traugott draws on the works of Tilly, Lees, and Chorley for his analysis. Traugott’s main argument is that the organizational hypothesis he puts forward can account for most, if not all the similarities and differences between the two groups during the Revolution. The organizational hypothesis argues that the organization of individuals into their respective camps, which, in the case of the French, were the Mobile Guard and the National Workshops. These two groups ended up on opposite sides
…show more content…
In Traugott, our main unit of analysis we are looking at are the groups at play, which are the National Workshops and the Mobile Guards. This is consistent with Tilly’s model. Along with that, there is a contention for power between these two groups. The National Workshops, specifically the groups of people that come from the Workshops, are unified for a revolution to overthrow the Republic, whereas the Mobile Guards are there to protect the people in power. There is violence in June between these two groups, with arrests of the protesters and deaths on both sides. The key is that the causal factor that caused all this to Traugott is the organization of these groups, which is consistent with Tilly’s assertions. To tie into that, Traugott uses data from before June 1848 to draw conclusions from what happened in June instead of using the events in June to explain his …show more content…
It is plausible with the available data and the case that is being presented. The structures of the two groups, the Mobile Guard and the National Workshops, and how the Workshops not so much collapsed, as much as became unorganized and were able to be manipulated and transformed into the revolutionaries the Parisians needed and wanted. It is also plausible to see how the organization of the Mobile Guard ensured that they would stay loyal to government. By providing stability, isolation, and grievance solutions, it is fair to see that there is something to structure and
In Traugott, our main unit of analysis we are looking at are the groups at play, which are the National Workshops and the Mobile Guards. This is consistent with Tilly’s model. Along with that, there is a contention for power between these two groups. The National Workshops, specifically the groups of people that come from the Workshops, are unified for a revolution to overthrow the Republic, whereas the Mobile Guards are there to protect the people in power. There is violence in June between these two groups, with arrests of the protesters and deaths on both sides. The key is that the causal factor that caused all this to Traugott is the organization of these groups, which is consistent with Tilly’s assertions. To tie into that, Traugott uses data from before June 1848 to draw conclusions from what happened in June instead of using the events in June to explain his …show more content…
It is plausible with the available data and the case that is being presented. The structures of the two groups, the Mobile Guard and the National Workshops, and how the Workshops not so much collapsed, as much as became unorganized and were able to be manipulated and transformed into the revolutionaries the Parisians needed and wanted. It is also plausible to see how the organization of the Mobile Guard ensured that they would stay loyal to government. By providing stability, isolation, and grievance solutions, it is fair to see that there is something to structure and