Howard Barrell, who I interviewed last week about the end of apartheid, has passed along an amendment to one of his remarks:
Kurt Schock has pointed out to me -- and I accept -- that I misrepresented the argument he puts forward in his book Unarmed Insurrections: People Power Movements in Nondemocracies....I implied in the interview that Schock had suggested a deterministic argument regarding the decline of violent revolutionary movements and the ascendance of nonviolent "people power" movements. On this basis, I added that current insurgencies, such as that in Afghanistan, might, if they succeed, "play havoc" with his view.
In fact, in the book, Schock merely analyses a trend towards people power movements; he is careful not to derive any broad prediction from the trend. So there can be no question of havoc threatening his view.
How I came to make the error I cannot account. But I did. And I apologise.
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSS
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time.
film development|2.15.10 @ 10:14AM|#
Another error on this site won't make a difference.
Untermensch|2.15.10 @ 10:26AM|#
You're correct: another one won't make you right.
Almanian|2.15.10 @ 10:20AM|#
Does anyone ever comment on one-armed insurrections? No. Why?
Racist!!!
|2.15.10 @ 10:38AM|#
Fascinating, just keeps getting better all the time doesnt it?
Jess
www.isp-logging.net.tc
Kant feel Pietzsche|2.15.10 @ 11:08AM|#
I would have bet your name was "dick"-bobber, you filthy bot.
|2.15.10 @ 11:30AM|#
INFIDEL!!!