Wuthnow brings up some interesting points that explore the role of the institution in fomenting or inhibiting a secessionist movement. Essentially, Wuthnow argues that when fissures develop in the ruling class, there is space for dissenting ideas to be voiced and spread. This lays the foundation for a secessionist or reforming movement to take place, its success then depends on whether or not a portion of the now fractured elite will give it the support, resources, and legitimacy that it needs to flourish. At this point, it only needs time and the survival of its patrons to affect social, political, and cultural change.

While this is an interesting idea that does a great job of looking into the institutional aspect of secession, it seems to fall short of acknowledging how the people, those who allow the movement to occur and seek a political or social change, fit into things. Yes, it’s important to understand that a political party needs to direct a political or social break. However, Wuthnnow goes so far as to argue that any social or cultural change comes from the social elite (political and religious leaders, the intelligentsia, artists, printers, etc.), who put forth potential changes that the masses eventually latch on to, allowing the elite to eventually direct them into a cultural reformation. This seems a little to close to “Great (White) Man History) to me. While Wuthnow does briefly acknowledge that other things, such as trade and population change, may affect culture, he isn’t invested enough in these aspects of culture to seriously discuss them.

I did appreciate the exploration of the institutional aspect of secession, but when exploring this topic we can’t forget that normal, everyday people are the ones causing change.