Power and Protest (Social Movements) -
Introduction
Return to: Imagining
Other Index Page
Social movements and the 'radical
twentieth century' (week 1 continued)
Social movements - a closer look at the theory
Summary:
1. Introductory note: what is a social movement.
2. When did social movements first appear?
3. The self-production of society
4. Why study social movements?
5. Origins of these notes.
6. Aims and learning outcomes.
1. Introductory
note: what is a social movement?
General
definition:
The study of politics has many
aspects and covers, for example, the study of institutions (governments,
parliaments etc), concepts (democracy, totalitarianism etc), philosophy (what
is a “just” regime? why should we obey the law? etc), and behaviour (how/why do
people vote the way they do, what determines the behaviour of political
representatives, etc).
When we study political
behaviour, or action, we could focus on individuals, or on groups. With Social
Movements we are dealing with political action by groups or collectives
(rather than with individuals).
A social
movement is a "collective endeavour
to promote or resist change in the society of which it forms part" (Bottomore 1979).
However, it is clear that there
are many ways in which groups act to get political change: people may protest,
or riot, or carry out a rebellion or a revolution; they may form a
pressure-group or a political party, and this definition does not distinguish a
social movement from, say, a political party.
On the other
hand, Heywood (1997) defines a social movement as: “A collective body
distinguished by a high level of commitment and political activism, but often
lacking a clear organisation”.
The key difference is that social
movements are not organised in the way that parties or pressure groups
are: they do not (usually) have “membership”, central staff, offices and
suchlike. They act in a more diffuse, perhaps episodic, way than organised
political formations – as Bottomore puts it. On the
other hand, I would say that their actions are more deliberate than
riots or mobs, since they usually have goals and carefully chose methods of
action. Some social movements may be revolutionary – others want less radical
change.
Giddens (1989 ch 19) makes an important point
when he says that they are "a
collective attempt to further a common interest, or secure a common goal, through
collective action outside the sphere of established institutions" (my emphasis).
Bottomore makes another significant point: social
movements, if successful, "establish
preconditions for changes of policy or regime, by bringing into question the
legitimacy of the existing political system (in part or in whole), creating a
different climate of opinion, and proposing alternatives."
This
last point seems to me to be crucial, and may be the most important
distinguishing feature of social movements, since most political action (apart
from that taken by revolutionary parties) is within the constraints of the
existing system. [See the notes on social
movements in the twentieth century].
Social
movements are usually broad, and may contain, or lead
to the creation of, “organised political formations.” For example, the labour
movement most clearly led to the creation of (socialist) political parties, and
it “contains” organisations such as trade unions as well as political parties.
2. When
did “social movements” first appear?
If we distinguish social
movements from e.g. peasant rebellions, as suggested above (since such
rebellions lacked clear political objectives) then social movements seem to be
a fairly “modern” phenomenon, arising in an age when people held democratic
expectations.
Thus the English Civil War
(during which period there were movements such as the Levellers and the
Diggers) and the French Revolution of 1789 (which led to a flourishing of
democratic organisations, as well as “mobs” – see below) are key historical
events that brought about the kind of society where social movements could
exist. Before then, social restrictions were such as to make collective
consciousness and action highly unlikely (though one might include, as does Aberle [see below] millenarian movements, that is,
movements waiting for the end of the world at the arrival of the first
millennium, as social movements…).
Bottomore (1979) notes that probably the earliest
reference to social movements is in the book by Lorenz von Stein: History of
the Social Movement in France from 1789 to the present day. It is even
possible, argues Bottomore, that this book influenced
Marx’s account of the proletariat, which von Stein saw as arising from the
demands for greater social independence leading up to the French Revolution.
As can be seen from what has just
been said, one of the earliest social movements was the labour movement.
However, Alexis de Tocqueville argued that, especially in 19th
century America, the “middle class” had become a social movement. We do have to
note here, however, that many would argue that there is a distinction between a
social movement and a social class: as Marx argued, the working class has
gained in confidence and tried to influence the political system – or even to
overthrow it, but we need to distinguish between the working class and the
“labour movement”. I would suggest that two features of a class make it
distinct from a social movement: (i) a class
(certainly by a Marxist definition) is a broad social stratum that has a
particular economic role (viz., the proletariat sells its ability to work to
the bourgeoisie or capitalists); (ii) it is rare (i.e. only in
pre-revolutionary situations) for a class to be as homogenous in its political outlook
as a social movement. In other words a social movement is broader in its
composition (it may be drawn from a number of social classes) but narrower in
its aims (except when class has become highly organised). As Marx pointed out,
not all the working class are conscious of being working class. (Presumably
Marx would have seen de Tocqueville’s “middle class”
as in fact comprising either the more skilled members of the working class, and
those who thought they were “above” the workers, or the lower members of the
capitalist class i.e. those not wealthy enough to see themselves as capitalists
or owners of industry).
3. The
self-production of society.
For some
modern sociologists, especially Alain Touraine, (but also Tom Bottomore) a social movement is a large number of people
taking part in the construction and reconstruction of their society… Touraine
(e.g. 1977) uses the expression “the self-production of society" as he
argues that societies have a self-awareness that gives them their identity.
They “recognise themselves” as a result of action, decisions, transactions,
domination, conflicts etc.
There are
further theoretical notes at Social
movements - theory.
4. Why study
social movements?
The study of social movements
brings together Sociology and Politics: social movements often have a political
impact, but they do not set out to be political organisations or parties.
Sociologists are interested in
the nature of such movements and how they work, but a central question is: why
do social movements arise? This is an especially pertinent question – and a
Political question - in (so-called) democracies: if there is a democratic
political system, why don’t people work within it when they want something
changed?
It is my view that most people desire more control over their own
lives, and that this desire always manifests itself somehow, but sometimes the
political system blocks or frustrates such desires.
Then protest and social movements (as well as pressure-groups,
which are more organised groupings) are likely to arise.
Should you be interested – actively or passively – in these
questions you will want to know more about social movements.
5. These
notes have their origins in:
(i) an issue of
the New Internationalist (NI) magazine (Issue No. 309, January-February 1999)
titled The Radical Twentieth Century;
(ii) a course on social movements, as part of the Politics Degree
at UEL, which I designed and helped to teach. I took the liberty of using the
same name that NI had come up with: The radical Twentieth century. See:
UEL Course Outlines
6. Aims and
Learning outcomes of People Power (Social Movements):
In attempting to understand social
movements the aim is that you should become familiar with the following, in
both general terms and in relation to each movement:
- the
beliefs or ideology behind a social movement
- the
origins (intellectual as well as historical) and the social/political context
- features of such movements, viz: aims organisation and strategies
- their
impact and effectiveness, especially in political terms
- whether
such movements still exist or have contemporary relevance
- comparisons
between the social movement and other movements or organisations with similar
aims or beliefs.
You should
also gain an understanding of:
- relevant concepts and theories from politics and social
theory (e.g. definitions and typologies of social movements and “new” social movements, such
descriptive terms as "radical" and reformist)
- the
role of the state/politics, in relation both to occurrence of radical movements
and in reaction to them.
************