Abstract
Paradigm warfare is a well-worn way of engaging in the polemics of research, but it frequently reduces paradigms to caricatures and turns complex reports of empirical research into cartoons. This is illustrated by two one-sided accounts of the Chiapas rebellion: one based on a simplistic “political opportunity” cartoon and the other on a foreshortened “culturalist” one. Reducing the many-sided (and in some ways ambiguous) approaches of the “political process” model to a supposedly hegemonic paradigm neglects many substantive contributions and cuts with too broad a stroke at “social movements” while ignoring the many-branched contributions of research and theory on contentious politics.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
