The relative deprivation hypothesis is probably one of the better ones around, especially since it is one of the few that actually reflects how we, as a species, think / perceive, which is in "relative" terms. Part of the reason why I suggested looking at marriage is that it is a rather complex proxy for both sex and status that is independent of any particular economic system 9i.e. it goes on regardless of the formal economic systems).

One of the other things that, I think, is important to look at is the countervailing question. Why do me rebel when they have (good) jobs? Take a look, for example, at the number of people involved in terrorist attacks who have well paying jobs and great careers. I would submit, as a subject for discussion, that the emphasis on looking at the unemployment - rebellion nexus is really a reflection of the US and Western cultural assumption of the primacy of income as a status marker, and its obverse; looking at well employed people who "rebel" casts doubt on that assumption.

Having thrown the cat amongst the pidgeons, I'll now gracefully withdraw ...