Protest and armed conflict are typically conceived of as independent of each other and studied separately. However, the occurrence of pro-tests before, during, and after armed conflict across the globe seems to contradict the idea that different expressions of conflict – both protest and armed conflict – are unrelated. This research proposes that different expressions of conflict can be studied as related. The contributions on protest and rebellion of T.R. Gurr (2011) and others (Skocpol, 1979; Tilly, 2006; Tarrow, 1993), and on armed conflict (Bartusevičius & Gleditsch, 2019; Goldstone, 2019; Shultziner & Goldberg, 2019) are re-evaluated to argue that “different” forms of conflict – namely, protests, protest campaigns, and armed conflict – can be understood and analysed as part of wider processes of collective action. Three such processes are explored: escalation towards armed conflict, de-escalation away from armed conflict, and recurrence of specific expressions of conflict across time. I argue that each one of these processes can be described in rela-tion to country-specific changes in political freedoms, inequality, state strength, state legitimacy, and the provision of public services. To illustrate the processes of escalation, de-escalation, and recurrence of expressions of conflict, this study focuses on the cases of South Afri-ca and Colombia to examine the different patterns of interconnection and disconnection between protests, protest campaigns and armed con-flict. Conflict is explored in Colombia between 1948 and 2016, and in South Africa between 1948 and 2008, via a mixed methodology.