Comments on Jeff Goodwin's ?Toward a new sociology of revolutions?

Abstract

If I understand Jeff Goodwin's piece correctly, he is right on at least two general points. First that the more recent and ultimately humbler approaches to the study of revolutions, which are historically grounded, conjunctural, and theoretically eclectic are better ways of deciphering the dynamics (or at least the mechanics) of revolutionary situations and outcomes. Second that like other sociologies, these new approaches tend to blur the distinction between self-created concepts and reality. Overarching and generally useful concepts of culture and state are forwarded but immediately, albeit unconsciously, used as means to replace boundaries with borders.