Researchers of revolutionary waves argue that early cases diffuse mobilization to later cases which are, compared with their forerunners, disadvantaged as they have fewer favorable antecedent conditions and less strategic protagonists. Using fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) and comparative case studies, I examine the 2011 Arab Uprisings in order to ask: (1) Why does revolutionary struggle (mass mobilization to topple an existing regime) in a given region emerge in and then diffuse to some countries but not others? and (2) Why do the struggles vary in form—that is, in terms of social composition, action types, and demands? My study finds three configurations of antecedent conditions that favor the emergence of revolutionary struggle. The three “paths” follow a two-sided narrowing pattern: each successive path has fewer expected favorable conditions and yields a less expansive form of struggle. These paths account for the six national cases of “revolutionary struggle” in the region, and co-occur with one path leading to mass reformist struggle and several other paths leading to relative quiescence. Overall, the article demonstrates how specific antecedent conditions combine in causal ways amid the temporal unfolding of a revolutionary wave. Furthermore, by identifying the narrowing pattern of revolutionary diffusion, the article suggests that later struggles essentially reflect locally informed strategic rationales, not irrational emulation or externally driven emergent processes, as posited by previous studies.

革命浪潮的研究人员认为，早期案例将动员扩散到后来的案例中，与之前的案例相比，这些案例处于不利地位，因为它们的先行条件较少，战略主角较少。使用模糊集定性比较分析 (fsQCA) 和比较案例研究，我研究了 2011 年的阿拉伯起义，以便提出以下问题：（1）为什么在特定地区出现革命斗争（大规模动员推翻现有政权），然后扩散到某些国家而不扩散到其他国家？（2）为什么斗争形式不同——即在社会构成、行动类型和要求方面？我的研究发现了有利于革命斗争出现的三种先行条件。三个“路径”遵循双边收窄模式：每条连续的路径都具有较少的预期有利条件，并产生较不广泛的斗争形式。这些路径解释了该地区六个全国性的“革命斗争”案例，并与一条导致大规模改良主义斗争的路径和其他几条导致相对平静的路径同时发生。总体而言，本文展示了特定的先行条件如何在革命浪潮的时间展开中以因果方式结合起来。此外，通过确定革命扩散的缩小模式，本文认为，后来的斗争本质上反映了当地知情的战略原理，而不是先前研究所假设的非理性竞争或外部驱动的新兴过程。