SUCCESS FACTORS IN ASSASSINATIONS

Megan Reynolds

Penn State Harrisburg

 

     Assassination is a method of revolt that has existed since the beginning of organized society.  Assassinations are motivated by many factors including issues involving politics, religion, and differing ideologies.  Different groups will make use of assassination as a means of striking social change.  Groups who have power will assassinate individuals threatening their way of life or the status quo, and groups who do not have power will assassinate individuals in positions of power to provoke social change for the betterment of their life circumstances.  This paper seeks to address factors associated with successful assassinations, as defined by termination of the target.

TURKS THEORY OF POLITICAL CRIMINALITY

     Turk’s (1982) model of political criminality focuses on the power struggles that can exist between the authority and the challenger group.  The authority consists of individuals in positions of power.  These people govern the society in which they live in a manner comfortable and consistent with their ways of life.  Their power allows them to determine what is right and wrong, legal or illegal. 

     This manner of living is not always a positive way of life for individuals in the challenger groups.  According to Turk (1982), challenger groups are individuals who lack power and feel oppression in some capacity as a result of the authority group.  Challenger groups organize and display dissent in some capacity against the authority.  The more knowledge and resources a challenger group has, the more success they will see in their pursuit for change.

     Challenger groups that attempt change in a society threaten the status quo.  The status quo is a comfortable manner of life for those in authority, and as long as the status quo is met, there is peace in a society.  When challenger groups press for societal change they are met with strong opposition from the authority, the group who is trying to maintain their comfortable way of life.  If change cannot be achieved on terms that are comfortable for both groups, displays of open dissent can result in violence on both sides.  In circumstances where change is not met, a representative or figure of power in either of these groups, the authority or the challenger group, can be faced with assassination.  According to Turk (1982), this assassination can act as a dire attempt by the authority group to “behead” the challenger group who is seeking to change the status quo.  In opposition, assassination for the challenger group can act as a catalyst for social change.  Each side can utilize assassination as a technique to serve their agenda in this power struggle.

DATA AND METHODS

     A secondary data source is utilized for the research in this study.  The original data were collected by; Feierabend, Feierabend, Nesvold, and  Jagger, and is titled “Data Bank of Assassins. This data file contains information about all assassinations and assassination attempts that occurred between 1948-1967.  The researchers compiled this data using the New York Times index.

     The dependant variable for this study is whether or not the assassination was successful, defined as termination of the target. The outcome is defined as an assassination that is either successful or unsuccessful.

     The first independent variable is the presence of minority hostility.  Countries characterized by minority hostility are hypothesized to have a higher incidence of successful assassinations than countries lacking minority hostility. This terminology is not referencing racial motivations.  Rather, the majority groups are defined as the groups that have power, whereas minority groups are defined as groups that do not have power.  The second independent variable is country rank.  Countries can be classified as first, second, or third world. The third independent variable is derived from Weber’s Theory of Bureaucracy (Scott 1992).  Weber outlines three different forms of authority; traditional, legitimate, and charismatic.  Traditional authority is obtained through heredity as is the case with royalty, legitimate authority is obtained through political maneuvering such as a president or a prime minister, and charismatic authority is power obtained through personality, as was displayed through the actions of charismatic leader Martin Luther King Jr. The fourth independent variable, collateral damage, is defined as injuries to individuals other than the target. The fifth independent variable focuses on how the nature of tension will affect the outcome of the assassination.  For the purposes of this work, the focus will be on a presence of political tension.

     The following hypotheses were developed utilizing the previously discussed variables that are grounded in Turk’s theory:

H1: Assassinations committed in countries characterized by minority hostilities are more likely to be successful.

H2: Assassinations are more likely to be successful in first world countries.

H3: Charismatic authority figures (whether related to authority or challenger groups) are most likely to be the targets of successful assassination attempts.

H4: Collateral damage (injuries to individuals that are not the assassination target) is negatively associated with successful assassination attempts.

H5: Assassination attempts related to political tension are more likely to be successful than attempts related to other types of tension.