Social Activism Memo

Lit Review Memo Example 2: (please do not publish in any way without author’s permission, ), 8/25/2016. For educational purposes only.

Social Activism Memo

How is social movement defined? OR how are social movements conceptualized?

Klandermans: uses Tarrow definition

· “Social movements are ‘collective challenges by people with common purposes, solidarity in sustained interaction with elites, opponents and authorities’ (1994, p. 4).

· Disruptive action in the name of a common claim against opponent, rooted in feelings (social psych) solidarity/coll. Identity and with sustained action becomes social movement (importance of time- extension in time makes a movement distinct from an event- mine)

Wertsch:

· collective remembering- mediated action distributed btw agents and cultural tools they use

Diani and della Porta:

· social movement is a social process consisting of mechanisms through which actors engage in collective action

o they are involved in conflictual relations with a clear opponent, have dense informal networks, share collective identity (mixes social network with framing/narrative- mine)

o different from other forms of collective action

Neil Smelsner:

· from above Diani and Della Porta- social movement as side effect of overrapid transformation- value-added model, people are upset with change

Wiktorowicz:

· definition of Islamic activism: "the mobilization of contention to support Muslim causes." (broad definition, no structural requirements-although interested in social structures and their linkages- as Diani and della Porta might have it, might not share a completely collective identity- mine)

o includes propogation movements, terrorist groups, collective action rooted in Islamic symbols and identities, explicitly political movements wanting to establish Islamic state, in-ward looking groups promoting Islamic spirituality through collective efforts. (p. 2)

o similar to other forms of social activism (p. 3)

Poulson:

· states: social movements and revolutions facilitated by same social processes

· studies revolutions but uses social movement language

· revolutions distinct in that they always require large scale social change at level of government (therefore, corporations do not have revolutions against them)

Gurr:

· political violence def: "all collective attacks within a political community against the political regime, its actors-including competing political groups as well as incumbants- or its policies."

McCarthy and Zald:

· Social movement definition: "A social movement is a set of opinions and beliefs in a population which represents preferences for changing some elements of the social structure and/or reward distribution of a society." (p. 1217-1218)

· Countermovement definition: "A countermovement is a set of opinions and beliefs in a population opposed to a social movement." (p. 1218) definitions focus on structure.

· Social Movement Organization (SMO) is: " a complex, or formal, organization which identifies its goals with the preferences of a social movement or a countermovement and attempts to implement those goals." (p. 1218)

Melucci:

· Discovered movement focused on reproduction of cultural identity (p. 304)- movement composed of loose networks; oppositional identity (crucial for Melucci's definition of social movement) developed through lifestyles, behvaioral norms, and ethical claims, movement perceived as self-defined alternatives against norms of majority (p. 304) (from Mayer)

· Melucci attempts to capture both structure and agency- focus on its actors within the limits and possibilities thrown up by structures (p. 304)- constructivist approach (from Mayer, Clifford Tatums article)

Mische: social movements as networks of actors engaged in dialogue, interacting with other networks (loose networks), not always with same goal

How do we theorize, conceptualize causes of social movement mobilization, organization, etc?

Psychological Theories (Relative Deprivation, Framing**)/[**]micro:

Retribution:(Gurr & Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. Center of International Studies., 1971; Klandermans, 1984, 1997; Webber, 2007)

Social Psych: (Klandermans, 1984, 1997)

1984 Klandermans combines relative deprivation with resource mobilization

- not about cause of movement to arise but shapes it takes.

Framing: the basics and basic adaptions of framing theories

Snow and Benford work- foundational- framing top down endeavor, gatekeepers

(della Porta & Kriesi, 1999)- has Snow article in edited book: similarity is symbolically constructed- active framing is at work during the whole process of cross-national diffusion: rituals, practices, symbols, tactics are not imported wholesale but modified and adapted (p. 10)

(Zald, 1996)- major work- looks at dynamics of framing process in regards to culture and ideology- Where does Zald put framing, where does Mellucci put framing and where do I put framing.

(Poulson, 2005)- framing in Islam- protest cycles and amending of master frames- non-Western case study- frame resonance

Framing: combinations:

(Johnston & Noakes, 2005a, 2005b)- develop core concepts of framing discusses both bottom up (Gamson) and top down approach in introduction chapter.- chapters in edited volume look at how framing works when integrated with other theories

(McAdam, 1996)-uses framing integrated with two other theories (PP and RMT) to explain mobilization process of SMs and use framework in cross-national perspective.

(Wiktorowicz, 2004)- combines framing with PP and RMT to look at Islamic activism, frames and counterframes

Framing: talk and networks

(Mische, 2003)- framing as occurs through talk in networks- case of Brazil- mechanisms of relation formation in conversational setting

(Steinberg, 1998)- I argue that this referential perspective on discourse both poses problems for the analysis of frames and ignores important semiotic dynamics of the framing process. Bakhtin Circle and sociocultural psychology, creates an alterative framework emphasizing the analysis of discursive repertoires. Sees tension in frame analysis- that frames are imported externally from belief system to collective action frame, whereas Steinburg believes the reverse, frames can express itself on ideology.- most look at discourse, not just top down approach- similar to Mische- must focus on dynamics of discourse; also sees frames as resources in RMT (see below)

Other framing:

(Ayers & McCaughey, 2003) framing concept used in edited book

Structural theories/macro (resource mobilization, political process):

Resource Mobilization:

(McCarthy & Zald, 1977)- basic RMT perspective

(Klandermans, 1984 and 1997)- combines social psych with RMT

(Steinberg, 1998)- frames as resources

(della Porta & Diani, 2006)- overview of RMT theoretical history and use as part of multiple useful theories in SM

(Buechler, 2000)- overview of theories including RMT with critiques (ignores psych, ideology and overstates importance of formal org structures

(Wiktorowicz, 2004)- uses RMT as part of conceptual framework on Islamic activism along with PP and framing

(Poulson, 2005)- Iranian social movements- looks at RMT and PP in relation to framing- bi-directional relationship. - Ex: frame is asisgned increasing legitimacy by movement supporters, it allows movement leaders increasing latitude when they use similar frames to identify other social problems. (p. 13) legitimacy of social movements affects legitimacy of gov and vice versa. (p. 13)

(McAdam, 1996)-uses RMT with PP and framing to use as framework in cross-national perspective.- sees RMT as building blocks of SM along with PP and allows research into organizational dynamics of SMs.

(Mayer & Roth, 1995) critiques RMT- as US favored theory: : "refrains from placing one social conflict on a higher order than another and does not attribute to one social movement a more fundamentally challenging character than another" (p. 300)- believes this could be linked to "lack of" class struggle in US (as compared to Europe) (p. 300)

(Johnston & Noakes, 2005)- believes RMT on its own (or PP) can not explain occurrence of SMs, subjective side- need to consider framing

Political Process Theory:

(Costain, 1992)- argues against RMT in favor of PP

(della Porta & Diani, 2006)- overview of PP theoretical history and use as part of multiple useful theories in SM (have eye out for new social movements with new dynamics- could be cause for openness)

(Wiktorowicz, 2004)- uses RMT as part of conceptual framework on Islamic activism along with PP and framing

Network theories/meso (movement as social network):

(Mische, 2003)- framing as occurs through talk in networks- case of Brazil- mechanisms of relation formation in conversational setting

(Bennet, 2008)- We examine three cases that suggest different contributions of communication technologies and narrative flow to the relationships among organizations and individual activists in mobilization networks; This analysis examines a case of each type of activity with an eye to how narratives travel over networks and either enable or inhibit the loose-tied relationships that social technologies can help establish." (p. 4)

· In our view, the more popular academic concept of framing continues to be useful for describing broad organizational alliances, calls to action, and media representations. Beyond this, it becomes important to grasp how narratives weave together social relationships by providing the interpretive contexts for frames. (also important: frames vs narratives or when to use each term).

(Wiktorwikz, 2004)- not network theory, but notes importance of networks: soc networks and informal resources for mobilization common in less open societies where visibility is dangerous. (p. 12-13)- and author feels this is important for studying Islamic activism

Combos (structuration):

(Johnston & Noakes, 2005)- believes RMT on its own (or PP) can not explain occurrence of SMs, subjective side- need to consider framing

Giddens- structuration-

· rules and resources that are drawn upon in the production and reproduction of social action are at the same time the means of system reproduction (thus a duality of structure)." (p. 19)

· end btw dualism of structure and individual

· reflexive practices and rationalization of action

(Klandermans, 1984 and 1997)- combines social psych with RMT

(Steinberg, 1998)- frames as resources

(della Porta & Diani, 2006)- overview of RMT theoretical history and use as part of multiple useful theories in SM (have eye out for new social movements with new dynamics- could be cause for openness)

(Wiktorowicz, 2004)- uses RMT as part of conceptual framework on Islamic activism along with PP and framing

FRAMING COMBOS

(McAdam, 1996)-uses framing integrated with two other theories (PP and RMT) to explain mobilization process of SMs and use framework in cross-national perspective.

(Wiktorowicz, 2004)- combines framing with PP and RMT to look at Islamic activism, frames and counterframes

Framing: talk and networks

(Mische, 2003)- framing as occurs through talk in networks- case of Brazil- mechanisms of relation formation in conversational setting

How are new movements “new”? What theoretical frameworks are there for studying them and how are they different from past frameworks?

1995- Mayer

· What makes movements new?: scholars emphasize characteristics and identify emergent cultural and political currents undervalued in traditional scholarship, which include:

1. concerns no longer revolve around legal and political equality or economic demands (first and foremost concern is lifestyle, cultural politics, identity and everyday life politics, policy and state power secondary) (p. 301)

2. organizational forms are more informal and egalitarian

3. shared class base is not common to those active in movements (p. 301)

· Mayer writes that they can challenge the above notions about what makes movements new-

· Main issue for Mayer- contradictory situation of social movements in the advanced Western nations- find recognition and support in society BUT social disposession and political disenfranchisement spreads, and political systems have become more intransigent to demands for civility and peace (from abstract)

· Uses regulation theory as framework

· Germany as case study (p. 307 forward)

o institutionalization of movement politics (p. 38): political parties, communities, public spheres- some help bridge phases of latency (little visible activity )p. 308

o host of organizational patterns coexist simultaneously ranging from informal grassroots orgs to professional orgs (Greenpeace) (p. 308)

o some competition

· Mayer’s conclusions: new social movements are:

1. generally heterogeneous

2. impression of movement continuity is partly due to fact that protest practice has spread to include more population groups and issues" (p. 309)- blurred boundaries between movements

3. local differences in patterns of politics and composition of movement milieus (p. 309)

· concl. Cont’d: New Social Movements in Germany Seen through the regulation approach

o connect rise of movements with conditions of German fordism and explain their development as crisis of fordism. Start with 60s movements- themes and critiques of consumption and mainstream culture (p. 310)New Left (p. 311)- radical and utopian critique of capitalism (p. 311)- historical development of movements since 1960s.

o Concludes: social movement development is encourage by specific social and political opportunity structure that has emerged out of crisis of accumulation regime" (p. 312)

· concl. Cont’d: Effects and Achievements of New Social Movements

o The more flexible model of accumulation, which they unwittingly helped to create, does not resolve any of the fundamental problems the movements have been articulating; rather it externalizes, represses and disguises them." (p. 313)

o processes of co-option- able to prevent decisive change in the way institutions function and avert actual shifts of power (p. 313)- institutions offer small concessions and reforms to stay in power (p. 314)

o "Contradictory situation in which contemporary social movements find themselves in the 1990s can be best explained through research based in regulation theory, which suggests that social movements should be examined in terms of their contribution and challenge to the new forms of regulation and their role in shaping the new regime of accumulation." (p. 314).."regulation theory helps us to see them act and be affected by the new terrain of post-Fordist capitalism and the post_Fordist state, which, while fraying at the margins (that is, admitting some representation of the new movement's demands), is concentrating increasingly authoritarian and militaristic power at the center, more protected form citizen participation than ever". (p. 314)- this all sounds very PP