Where parties or institutions do not manage conflict well and react with force, conflict can escalate. Conflict escalation describes the escalation of a conflict to a more destructive, confrontational, painful, or otherwise "less comfortable" level; in particular, it is concerned with how persons or forces can be controlled or subdued in conflict. Repression in any form (e.g. discriminatory legislation) stimulates the switch from nonviolence to violence particularly when the net opportunity cost of violence is small. There are at least two steps in the process of switching from nonviolence to violence. First, there is an emotional reaction to repression by classifying it as unjust, causing outrage, or by heightening an individual’s desire for security. Second, there is a decision on how to deal with this emotion, based on a calculation of the costs and benefits of violence. This process suggests that a synthesis of emotion-based and rational choice approaches is not only possible, but necessary, to explain why some nonviolent protest movements turn violent. While emotions are micro-level mechanisms motivating the recourse to violence, they are moderated by the opportunity costs of violent rebellion, which in turn, are weighed against the emotional or other intangible rewards from a violent response to repression (Sambanis and Zinn
Where parties or institutions do not manage conflict well and react with force, conflict can escalate. Conflict escalation describes the escalation of a conflict to a more destructive, confrontational, painful, or otherwise "less comfortable" level; in particular, it is concerned with how persons or forces can be controlled or subdued in conflict. Repression in any form (e.g. discriminatory legislation) stimulates the switch from nonviolence to violence particularly when the net opportunity cost of violence is small. There are at least two steps in the process of switching from nonviolence to violence. First, there is an emotional reaction to repression by classifying it as unjust, causing outrage, or by heightening an individual’s desire for security. Second, there is a decision on how to deal with this emotion, based on a calculation of the costs and benefits of violence. This process suggests that a synthesis of emotion-based and rational choice approaches is not only possible, but necessary, to explain why some nonviolent protest movements turn violent. While emotions are micro-level mechanisms motivating the recourse to violence, they are moderated by the opportunity costs of violent rebellion, which in turn, are weighed against the emotional or other intangible rewards from a violent response to repression (Sambanis and Zinn