No Other Way Out: States and Revolutionary Movements, 1945-1991

Cambridge Studies in Comparative Politics

by Jeff Goodwin

No Other Way Out provides a powerful explanation for the emergence of popular revolutionary movements, and the occurrence of actual revolutions, during the Cold War era. This sweeping study ranges from Southeast Asia in the 1940s and 1950s to Central America in the 1970s and 1980s and Eastern Europe in 1989. Goodwin demonstrates how the actions of specific types of authoritarian regimes unwittingly channeled popular resistance into radical and often violent directions. By comparing the historical trajectories of more than a dozen countries, Goodwin also shows how revolutionaries were able to create opportunities for seizing state power.

Genres: History, Politics, Sociology, Social Movements, Political Science, Nonfiction, Academic

428 pages, Paperback

First published June 18, 2001

About the author

Jeffrey Roger Goodwin is a professor of sociology at New York University. He holds a BA, MA and PhD from Harvard University. His research interests include social movements, revolutions, political violence, and terrorism.

Reviews

[Preethi Krishnan · Rating 4 out of 5]

No Other Way Out, analyzes revolutionary movements from a state centered perspective and demonstrates how revolutions emerge when there is "no other way out". As someone beginning to read about social movements, the first chapter that outlines the various terms and the theoretical framework used in his analysis is a treasure trove indeed. Goodwin is analyzing revolutions - movements that seek to overthrow the state regime. He argues that a state centered analysis best explains revolutions much more than a Marxist framework or a modernization perspective. While one may contest his claim of state centered analysis being the most important, it is certain that his analysis provides a very important insight into understanding revolutions. His case studies include two major regions - Vietnam, Malay and Philippines in South East Asia and Nicaragua, Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras in Central America. He demonstrates that where the state was repressive, as in the case of Vietnam and Nicaragua(and with no foreign aid), revolutions were successful. In countries where the state introduced more inclusive policies and initiated reforms, the revolution could not succeed in overthrowing the regime. Finally, Goodwin argues that revolutions may not necessarily succeed in a democracy. This book was published in 2001. Considering that we saw a number of revolutions in this decade, it is a good time to relook into his theoretical framework of a state centered analysis of revolutions.

[Brian · Rating 5 out of 5]

Jeff Goodwin presents a powerful, consistent, and empirically striking argument for a theoretical model of how and why revolutionary movements take shape and seize political power (or fail to). Drawing upon the evidence of both successful and abortive attempts to radically restructure state, social, and economic institutions in Southeast Asia, Central America, and Eastern Europe during the decades of the Cold War, Goodwin demonstrates that the structure of state power itself, and the ways in which it responds to the grievances of the populace, are determining factors in the trajectory and fate of revolutionary movements.

Briefly, regimes that are politically autonomous from both popular and elite social strata, exclude reformist elements from the political process, and violently repress their opponents tend to leave their disenfranchised subjects with the impression that there is no realistic means of redress besides wholesale replacement of the state apparatus - "no other way out". Goodwin does not claim that revolutions are solely a question of institutional structure and behavior, but rather that these factors explain how some authoritarian states inadvertently "construct" revolutionary movements out of diverse elements of discontent.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

Can you tell I am teaching my revolutions course again? This is an interesting historical/political science narrative about revolutions since 1945, focusing on southeast asia and central america. Good stuff, not too academic. Written by a Skocpol student who adds a little bit more human agency to her structuralist approach to revolutions.

[Jim Flora · Rating 5 out of 5]

Elegant explanation of revolutions. It doesn't capture everything, but the model it provides is a terrific starting point and needs to be taken under consideration.