Social Movement Theory Overheads Classical formulations (such as - - PDF document

1

Social Movement Theory Overheads Classical formulations (such as those of Le Bon and Tarde) conceived of collective behaviour as irrational and as based upon "social contagion". Oberschall (1973:12) depicts LeBon's view as follows: In a crowd, the rational faculties of the individual, his moral judgment and conscious personality come under the sway of contagion and suggestion frequently originating with a leader. These produce a "mental unity" or uniformity. The characteristic mark of crowds is credulity, mobility, exaggeration of both noble and base sentiments, and suggestibility. The law of the mental unity of crowds applies not

• nly to the "criminal" crowd, e.g., the type of crowd that stormed the

Bastile, but to crowds that possess a sense of responsibility, e.g., juries, the electorate, and parliamentary assemblies. Juries have a weak aptitude for rational judgment, they are swayed by suggestion,

• rators, and unconscious sentiments ... Revolutionary crowds are

drawn from the rootless, disorganized, mentally disturbed, criminal classes of big cities. ...

2

Collective Behaviour Early North American theorizing about collective action (a particular focus was behaviour in crowds but also included social movements) referred to this set of phenomena as collective behaviour (see Park and Burgess, 1921; Park, 1967). Collective behaviour was said to occur when a large number of people fail to accept some of the dominant values, norms, and/or leaders in a society (see Blumer, 1939; Smelser, 1962). One of the earliest North American sociologists to give this problem serious attention was Herbert Blumer. Blumer's (1939) work, followed in the footsteps of earlier European theorists (such as Le Bon, and Tarde') in that he concurred that "social contagion" was the main process underlying collective behaviour. Blumer argued that contagion occurred through "circular reaction". Circular reaction refers to: a type of interstimulation wherein the response of one individual reproduces the stimulation that has come from another individual and in being reflected back to this individual reinforces the stimulation. Thus the interstimulation assumes a circular form in which individuals reflect one another's states of feeling and in so doing intensify this

• feeling. It is well evidenced in the transmission of feelings and

moods among people who are in a state of excitement. (Blumer, 1969:70)

3

In contrast to Blumer, Turner and Killian argued that there is substantial diversity amongst the participants in collective behaviour. An emergent norm approach reflects the empirical observation that the crowd is characterized not by unanimity but by differential expression, with different individuals in the crowd feeling differently, participating because of diverse motives, and even acting differently. The illusion of unanimity arises because the behaviour of part of the crowd is perceived both by observers and by crowd members as being the sentiment of the whole crowd. Variant views and divergent forms of behaviour go unrecognized or are dismissed as

• unimportant. If, however, a complete similarity of the crowd

members is regarded as an illusion, another key problem arises. This is explaining the development and imposition of a pattern of differential expression that is perceived as unanimity. Such a shared understanding encourages behaviour consistent with the norm, inhibits behaviour contrary to it, and justifies restraining action against individuals who dissent. Since the norm is to some degree specific to the situation, differing in degree or in kind from the norms governing noncrowd situations it is an emergent norm.

4

Mass Society Theory Kornhauser (1959) has discussed the notion of "mass society". This is really another "breakdown" theory following from classical approaches (e.g., see Durkheim (1933). It argues that with industrialization and subsequent social changes, people have become isolated and alienated. Mass society, as depicted as Kornhauser, refers to a social system in which elites are readily open to influence by non-elites. Simultaneously, non-elites (in particular, those occupying marginal positions in society) are also, highly available for mobilization because they lack attachments to independent groups, the local community, voluntary associations, and occupational groups. Social conditions resemble a "mass society" when populations and elites can emotionally incite one another to extreme actions. Under such circumstances unconstrained social and political movements can develop (even totalitarian ones such as in Nazi Germany). In sum, in mass society, there is a lack of local primary groups and secondary associations to integrate individuals into the normative constraints of the larger society (Knoke, 1990).

5

RELATIVE DEPRIVATION A social psychological approach was developed during the 1960s that attempted to explain collective behaviour by referring to psychological states (see Davies, 1969, Gurr 1970). Relative deprivation refers to a difference or gap between what people believe they have a right to receive (their expectations) and what they actually receive (their achievements). Expectations and achievements may diverge for a number of reasons. First, both achievements and expectations may rise, but expectations may rise faster than achievements. Second, expectations may remain constant while achievements decline. In this situation welfare declines in absolute terms. A third possible scenario, is when there is a period of rising expectations and rising achievements which is followed by a decline in achievements, while expectations continue to rise. This pattern is know as a J-curve (because it can be graphically represented as an upside down and sloping "J").

6

Resource Mobilization and Collective Action The resource mobilization perspective conceives of collective action in terms of the mobilizing, converting, and transferring of resources from one group and one arena of action to other groups and actions (adherents of this approach include Tilly (1978), and Gamson (1975)). Mobilization refers to the process by which a discontented group assembles and invests resources for the pursuit of group goals. Collective action thought of in these terms, covers a wide range of social phenomena. According to Knoke (1990:67) the resource mobilization tradition see the central focus of social movement analysis as the understanding of: how organized groups acquire collective control over resources needed for challenging the authorities and how these resources are applied to affect social and political changes. A resource is anything that permits one social actor to control, provide, or apply a sanction to another: money, facilities, labour, and legitimacy (McCarthy and Zald, 1977: 1220), group size, discretionary time, organizing experience, legal skills, even violence. Mobilization is the process by which such resources become available to a social movement. The crucial concerns are the quantities of resources available to an aggrieved population, the conditions under which supporters will provide them to the movement, the degree to which a movement's formal organizations enjoy autonomy over resource disposal, and how the resources controlled by the opposing government and countermovements affect a movement's success or failure. The theory necessarily spans individual, organizational, and systemic levels of analysis.

7

There are two major strains of resource mobilization theory: 1) the entrepreneurial model, and 2) the political process model. The entrepreneurial model is associated with the work of McCarthy and Zald (1977) and conceives of activists as "entrepreneurs" who are in many ways like business entrepreneurs (likewise, movement organizations resemble business organizations in some key respects). The political process model, associated with the work of Charles Tilly (1978), focuses on the dynamics of political opportunity structures (see also Rule and Tilly 1975; Tilly et al. 1975; Gamson 1975; McAdam 1982). Such opportunity structures are partially created by movement actors, and can serve to either facilitate or constrain movement activity.

8

Steps to Mobilization: The Individual Level of Analysis At the level of the individual, becoming a participant in a social movement can be conceived as a process with four different steps (Klandermans and Oegema 1987): 1. becoming a part of the mobilization potential; 2. becoming a target of mobilization attempts; 3. becoming motivated to participate; 4.

• vercoming barriers to participate.

9

A Summary of Resource Mobilization Theory. Below is a summary of the main principles of resource mobilization theory: Collective action is more likely to occur, and to be successful, to the extent that the members of a contending group: 1. are bound together in dense social networks; 2. are highly socially polarized from advantaged groups; 3. are relatively unrepresented by existing groups (or parties); 4. have relatively high levels of shared social identity; 5. (compared with dominant/contending groups) have relatively high access to material resources (property, money, jobs), normative resources (communications media, educational institutions), and/or coercive resources (police, armed forces); 6. are relatively large in number, and have a large number

• f support bases. (Adapted from Brym with Fox 1989.)

If these structural conditions are met, the probability of collective action increases. (See Oberschall 1973; Gamson 1975; Tilly 1978; Brym (Brym with Fox 1989), has summarized the conditions under which third political parties have tended to emerge in Canada; see also Macpherson 1953; Lipset 1950; Pinard 1973; Brym 1980.)

10

New Social Movements: The Culture Thesis One theme that has emerged in the social movement literature, is that in recent years, new social movements have arisen in reaction to certain modernization processes in advanced capitalist societies. The birth of these new social movements has been facilitated by the rise of new values (see Inglehart, 1971; 1977). New social movement theorists argue that there has been a qualitative shift in the nature of socio-political action in the west. In particular, these new social movements are thought to be post- materialist. The new middle class is said to be discontented with the nature of post- modern society. New values are seen as providing the ideological and motivational background for the emergence of the new social movements. The values important to these new social movements include a desire for community, self-actualization, and personal as opposed to occupational, satisfaction. The environmental movement is seen as one of the "new social movements".

11

Social Structural Basis of the New Class, and New Social Movements Kriesi (1989) has examined the social structural basis of support for new social movements. As Kriesi notes, new class theorists have posited that a new class of "knowledge workers" has become engaged in a struggle for power and status against a still-dominant "old class" of business owners and executives in Western societies. Kriesi distinguishes between five different occupational segments. These are: 1) social and cultural specialists; 2) administrative and commercial personnel; 3) technical specialists, 4) craft specialists; and 5) protective services. According to Kriesi the category that comes closest to the ideal-type of specialists, is the category of "social and cultural specialists". The other four categories are argued to be more technocratic in character.

12

Social Movements and Social Identity New social movement theorists have argued that social (or collective) identity is a key network-based cognitive variable in explaining social movement participation. Hannigan (1985), in reviewing the "French School" (e.g. Touraine and Castells), notes that without a firm sense of identity a social movement will not develop. Identity (as well as an anti-institutional orientation) are said to be the "products of the group process and thus are emergent from the internal dialogue and self-analysis of the incipient movement itself."

13

An early split developed in the conservation movement between utilitarians such as Pinchot, and preservationists such as Muir. Preservationists were concerned with keeping certain areas of the natural environment free from any development or alteration except for the minor impacts from controlled recreation, and aesthetic appreciation. Natural areas were to be left in their natural, undisturbed states of wild beauty and/or uniqueness (Morrison, forthcoming). Utilitarians, by contrast, adopted the view that while natural resources should be managed carefully, and renewed properly, they should be exploited for economic benefit as well as other uses.

14

Schnaiberg and Gould (1994) provide a categorization scheme for describing different types of environmental movement organizations vis a vis their stance on the treadmill of production, and their position regarding addressing social inequalities. Schnaiberg and Gould argue that in terms of pushing for environmental protection: 1. some organizations have retreated from all attempts at influencing policy and have instead engaged only in voluntary alternative behaviours, such as reducing their own energy and product consumption; 2.

• ther organizations have attempted to persuade elite groups

that it is in the long-term interests of the treadmill to plan for environmental protection, in order to protect their investments. With regard to the dilemma of placing the bulk of the burden of environmental protection on the working class and poor, many movement

• rganizations have:

3. retreated from this issue by ignoring such concerns and keeping their distance from less powerful social groups and

• rganizations, or

4. in rare instances, a handful of organizations have tried to build strong coalitions to oppose treadmill elites by coupling environmental goals with economically and politically redistributive means in an effort to integrate environmental and distributive issues in a single major strategy.

15 Environmental Movement Types: Goals, Assumptions, and Strategies. Structuralist or radical mobilize to defeat economic elite and the treadmill of production

• key assumption: “most citizens benefit.
• Collective action in opposition to the treadmill.

Retreatist or deep ecologist transform society through appropriate technology and voluntary simplicity.

• key assumption “everyone” benefits.
• Individual and small group actions in opposition to the

treadmill. Reformist modify production to substantially reduce environmental problems.

• key assumption: “citizens” and investors have equal stakes

in production and environmental protection.

• Cooperative action with treadmill elites.

Meliorist “buy green,” and other consumer actions.

• key assumption: consumption leads production.
• Individual actions within the treadmill.

Cosmetologist recycle “litter.”

• key assumption: the government will take care of problems.
• Individual action only as directed by treadmill elites.

Social equity the problem is economic survival, not environmental protection.

• key assumption: poorer people need to have their basic

needs met.

• Support of the treadmill only insofar as more jobs and

income flow to the unempowered. Anti- environmentalist the problem is environmental alarmists, not the environment.

• key assumption: the market will automatically internalize

any short-term problems.

• No environmental protection action, and/or individual and

collective action in support of the treadmill. Schnaiberg and Gould (1994:158) Allan Schnaiberg and Kenneth Alan Gould. 1994. Environment and Society: The Enduring Conflict. New York: St. Martin’s Press.