The Paradox of Legitimacy: Resilience, Successes, and the Multiple Identities of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party in Turkey

Schoon, Eric W.

doi:10.1093/socpro/spv006

Cited by 18 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In contexts where the meaning structure of relationships are emergent or in flux, researchers can use a variety of methods to account for the emergence of expectations in a given relationship, including ethnography, interviews, historical analysis, and survey research. For example, in his analysis of the armed conflict between the Republic of Turkey and the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), Schoon (2015) uses statements by leaders and representatives of the PKK to identify claims made by the group that establish behavioral expectations. He then uses statements made by allies and supporters of the PKK to determine which expectations established by the PKK were shared by each particular audience, thus delineating multiple dyads with distinct sets of expectations.…”

Section: Expectationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In contexts where the meaning structure of relationships are emergent or in flux, assessing consent can be more challenging, but researchers again have a variety of methods at Schoon's (2015) example of the legitimacy of the PKK, supporters provided direct statements explaining and justifying their support for the group, with specific reference to mutual expectations of the relationship.…”

Section: Consentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Operationalizing Legitimacy

Schoon¹

2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Legitimacy is widely invoked as a condition, cause, and outcome of other social phenomena, yet measuring legitimacy is a persistent challenge. I synthesize approaches to conceptualizing legitimacy across the social sciences to identify widely agreed upon definitional properties, and build on these points of consensus to develop a generalizable approach to operationalization. Legitimacy implies specific relationships among three empirical elements: an object of legitimacy, an audience that confers legitimacy, and a relationship between the two that is defined by mutual expectations. Together, these empirical elements constitute a dyad (i.e., a single unit consisting of two nodes and a tie). By accounting for the ways that elements of the dyad interact, legitimacy (and illegitimacy) can be empirically established. I outline how this operationalization is compatible with approaches to theorizing legitimacy found in areas of study ranging from small group processes to institutional analysis. Followed to its logical conclusion, this operationalization has important implications for the study and theorization of legitimacy. It implies that legitimacy operates in the context of dyads, and does not function as an attribute of individuals, organizations, regimes, or other social objects. Consequently, the effects of legitimacy are limited to interaction between object and audience in the dyad. Finally, both the establishment and effects of legitimacy are mediated by network dynamics.

show abstract

Section: Expectationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Consentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Operationalizing Legitimacy

Schoon¹

2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This appeal fosters greater legitimacy, better matching between adherents and organizations, and lower coordination costs, all of which positively influence lethality and longevity. Yet Schoon (2014Schoon ( , 2015 argues that it is easier to identify illegitimacy than it is legitimacy. Illegitimacy can come with specific strategic benefits in light of the social constraints associated with legitimate norms.…”

Section: Intensity and Targets Of Violencementioning

confidence: 99%

Terrorism and Social Movements; Wiley-Blackwell Companion to Social Movements, 2nd Edition

Beck¹,

Schoon²

2017

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In spite of a proliferation of empirical research, scholarship on terrorism remains theoretically fragmented and often inconclusive on even basic issues. In this chapter, we detail how terrorism can be incorporated into the social movements and collective action scholarships' portfolio of research through a review of several of the most widely debated topics in current terrorism research: 1) how terrorism is defined; 2) dynamics of radicalization for individuals and groups; 3) intensity and targets of violence; 4) organizational diversification; and 5) the context of terrorist action. Taking a problem-centered approach, we detail how prior insights from scholarship on social movements and collective action can theoretically and substantively advance terrorism research.

show abstract

“…These conditions can be varied, from the natural resources available in a country (Collier and Hoeffler ) to the types of weapons that rebels are able to obtain (Coll ). As discussed above, while multiple studies demonstrate that material resources alone are insufficient for ending conflict (Call ; Schoon ), others highlight how material capacity can nevertheless allow states to supersede popular will in revolutionary contexts (e.g. Skocpol ; Pakulski ).…”

Section: The Challenges Of Legitimacymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Finally, increased focus on the relationality of legitimacy and illegitimacy will help us better understand how the effects of legitimation interact with the material conditions of a conflict. In his analysis of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) in Turkey, for example, Schoon () examines how legitimacy in the eyes of some audiences interacts with illegitimacy in the eyes of others, and argues that we should consider the cumulative effect of these different relationships in analyzing legitimation. Taking the logic of this approach further we see how analyzing legitimation through networks of relationships could allow researchers to examine legitimacy or illegitimacy as components of a single unit that also includes other relationships, such as those by which money, weapons or other material resources are providing.…”

Section: Rethinking the Challenges Of Legitimacymentioning

confidence: 99%

Rethinking Legitimacy and Illegitimacy in Violent Political Conflict

Schoon

2016

Sociology Compass

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Analytic and conceptual ambiguity associated with the study of legitimacy have motivated debates over the utility of this construct in the analysis of violent political conflict. Using these debates as a point of departure, I review several challenges that have limited the study of legitimacy in this area and discuss two features of legitimation that have gone widely overlooked: (i) the asymmetric causes and effects of legitimacy and illegitimacy, and (ii) the relational dynamics of legitimation. I argue that turning explicit analytic attention to the asymmetry and relationality of legitimacy and illegitimacy allows us to overcome the most intractable challenges associated with the analysis of legitimation in violent conflict.

show abstract

The Paradox of Legitimacy: Resilience, Successes, and the Multiple Identities of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party in Turkey

Cited by 18 publications

References 40 publications

Operationalizing Legitimacy

Operationalizing Legitimacy

Terrorism and Social Movements; Wiley-Blackwell Companion to Social Movements, 2nd Edition

Rethinking Legitimacy and Illegitimacy in Violent Political Conflict

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About