he Art of Revolution develops a general theory of the emergence, maintenance and transformation of social orders. Its point of departure is that every individual possesses a historically formed personal civilisation: a configuration of conceptions and assumptions about reality, norms and values, behavioural repertoires, goals and ideals. This civilisation continually arises and changes through civilising: the process in which civilisation elements are formed, transmitted, internalised, maintained, interpreted, modified, strengthened, weakened or rejected.
People live and act in concrete social associations – social circles – such as families, organisations, associations, political communities and states. When the members of a social circle share sufficient civilisation elements to make common expectations, judgement, cooperation and cohesion possible, a circle civilisation arises. Shared elements of that civilisation may be durably embedded in institutions and acquire coherence within systems of ideas and narratives. Institutionalisation makes civilisation elements less dependent on their individual bearers and may strengthen the power bases of actors who act within or in accordance with those institutions. Ideas can thereby acquire social power.
The theory describes two self-reinforcing mechanisms in this connection. In the legitimising civilisation loop, circle civilisations produce institutions that acquire authority and, from that position of authority, confirm and legitimate the premises of the same civilisation. In the reproductive civilisation loop, individuals are civilised within existing circle civilisations and, through conduct based on those civilisations, subsequently contribute to the reproduction of the same civilisation and its institutions. Social sanctioning, including the pathologisation of divergent views, may further support these processes.
Personal civilisations, circle civilisations, social relations and institutions nevertheless change continually and influence one another reciprocally. These changes do not necessarily occur simultaneously, at the same pace or in the same direction. Tensions may consequently arise, and changes may spread from one social circle or institution to other social associations. Processes of social change thus have a recursive character: their effects once again modify personal and circle civilisations, social relations and institutions, and thereby themselves become causes of further change. They therefore need not have a clearly identifiable beginning or end. Purposive action may play an important part in such processes, but does not make the process of social change as a whole fully purposive or controllable.
Political change may also differ in the extent to which it affects an existing circle civilisation. It may concern alternative decisions within already accepted standards, the modification of particular civilisation elements, or a coherent set of elements that also calls a dominant circle civilisation and major institutions into question. These forms are analytical categories and, in social reality, constitute a continuum rather than sharply separated types.
A movement may arise when individuals and social circles become durably connected around a shared or developing system of ideas. It need not form a single organisation and may arise organically or be formed and organised purposively. Within a movement, different social circles, organisations, media and institutions may each perform a distinct function in developing, interpreting, disseminating, reproducing and institutionalising civilisation elements. As an elite comes to be recognised as directive, purposive coordination and institutionalisation may increase. When the system of ideas is also internalised and becomes socially operative beyond the movement’s own associations, the movement may initiate a broader process of civilising.
Within this framework, the state is understood as a particular territorial social circle to which the general theory of social circles applies. Within its territory, individuals cannot escape collectively binding rules simply by exiting. The state claims the exclusive legitimate use of coercion and may compel the surrender of resources for collective purposes. Its social operation, however, also rests on internalised and reproduced legitimacy. The governing elite may legitimate decisions and claims to power as serving the general interest without that legitimation being fully shared by all citizens.
The Art of Revolution thus describes how social orders arise and change without central design, and how actors attempt to bring about change purposively within them. The theory explains how ideas may acquire social power through civilising, the formation of social circles, movements and institutionalisation, without assuming that actors can fully control the outcomes.