This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (August 2010)

The examples and perspective in this article deal primarily with USA and Europe and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject. Please improve this article and discuss the issue on the talk page. (May 2012)

Sociology
Outline
Theory · History
Positivism · Antipositivism Functionalism · Conflict theory Middle-range · Mathematical Critical theory · Socialization Structure and agency
Research methods
Quantitative · Qualitative Historical · Computational Ethnographic · Network analytic
Topics · Subfields
Cities · Class · Crime · Culture Deviance · Demography · Education Economy · Environment · Family Gender · Health · Industry · Internet Knowledge · Law · Medicine Politics · Mobility · Race and ethnicity Rationalization · Religion · Science Secularization · Social networks Social psychology · Stratification
Browse
Portal Category tree · Lists Journals · Sociologists Article index
v t e

Social movements are a type of group action. They are large informal groupings of individuals or organizations which focus on specific political or social issues. In other words, they carry out, resist or undo a social change.

Modern Western social movements became possible through education (the wider dissemination of literature), and increased mobility of labor due to the industrialization and urbanization of 19th century societies. It is sometimes argued that the freedom of expression, education and relative economic independence prevalent in the modern Western culture are responsible for the unprecedented number and scope of various contemporary social movements. However, others point out that many of the social movements of the last hundred years grew up, like the Mau Mau in Kenya, to oppose Western colonialism. Either way, social movements have been and continued to be closely connected with democratic political systems. Occasionally, social movements have been involved in democratizing nations, but more often they have flourished after democratization. Over the past 200 years, they have become part of a popular and global expression of dissent.^[1]

Modern movements often utilize technology and the internet to mobilize people globally. Adapting to communication trends is a common theme among successful movements.

Political science and sociology have developed a variety of theories and empirical research on social movements. For example, some research in political science highlights the relation between popular movements and the formation of new political parties as well as discussing the function of social movements in relation to agenda setting and influence on politics.

Definition[link]

Charles Tilly defines social movements as a series of contentious performances, displays and campaigns by which ordinary people make collective claims on others .^[1] For Tilly, social movements are a major vehicle for ordinary people's participation in public politics.^[2] He argues that there are three major elements to a social movement:^[1]

1. Campaigns: a sustained, organized public effort making collective claims of target authorities;
2. Repertoire (repertoire of contention): employment of combinations from among the following forms of political action: creation of special-purpose associations and coalitions, public meetings, solemn processions, vigils, rallies, demonstrations, petition drives, statements to and in public media, and pamphleteering; and
3. WUNC displays: participants' concerted public representation of worthiness, unity, numbers, and commitments on the part of themselves and/or their constituencies.

Sidney Tarrow defines a social movement as collective challenges [to elites, authorities, other groups or cultural codes] by people with common purposes and solidarity in sustained interactions with elites, opponents and authorities. He specifically distinguishes social movements from political parties and advocacy groups.^[3]

History[link]

American Civil Rights Movement is one of the most famous social movements of the 20th century. Here, Martin Luther King is giving his "I Have a Dream" speech, in front of the Lincoln Memorial during the 1963 March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom

The term "social movements" was introduced in 1848 by the German Sociologist Lorenz von Stein in his book Socialist and Communist Movements since the Third French Revolution (1848) in which he introduced the term "social movement" into scholarly discussions - actually depicting in this way political movements fighting for the social rights understood as welfare rights.

Tilly argues that the early growth of social movements was connected to broad economic and political changes including parliamentarization, market capitalization, and proletarianization.^[1] Political movements that evolved in late 18th century, like those connected to the French Revolution and the Polish Constitution of May 3, 1791 are among the first documented social movements, although Tilly notes that the British abolitionist movement has "some claim" to be the first social movement (becoming one between the sugar boycott of 1791 and the second great petition drive of 1806). The labor movement and socialist movement of the late 19th century are seen as the prototypical social movements, leading to the formation of communist and social democratic parties and organisations. From 1815, Britain after victory in the Napoleonic Wars entered a period of social upheaval. Similar tendencies were seen in other countries as pressure for reform continued, for example in Russia with the Russian Revolution of 1905 and of 1917, resulting in the collapse of the Russian State around the end of the First World War.

In 1945, Britain after victory in the Second World War entered a period of radical reform and change. In the post-war period, women's rights, gay rights, peace, civil rights, anti-nuclear and environmental movements emerged, often dubbed the New Social Movements ^[4] They led, among other things, to the formation of green parties and organisations influenced by the new left. Some find in the end of the 1990s the emergence of a new global social movement, the anti-globalization movement. Some social movement scholars posit that with the rapid pace of globalization, the potential for the emergence of new type of social movement is latent—they make the analogy to national movements of the past to describe what has been termed a global citizens movement.

Key processes[link]

Several key processes lie behind the history of social movements. Urbanization led to larger settlements, where people of similar goals could find each other, gather and organize. This facilitated social interaction between scores of people, and it was in urban areas that those early social movements first appeared. Similarly, the process of industrialization which gathered large masses of workers in the same region explains why many of those early social movements addressed matters such as economic wellbeing, important to the worker class. Many other social movements were created at universities, where the process of mass education brought many people together. With the development of communication technologies, creation and activities of social movements became easier - from printed pamphlets circulating in the 18th century coffeehouses to newspapers and Internet, all those tools became important factors in the growth of the social movements. Finally, the spread of democracy and political rights like the freedom of speech made the creation and functioning of social movements much easier.

Types of social movement[link]

Types of social movements.^[5]

Sociologists distinguish between several types of social movement:

• Scope:
  • reform movement - movements advocating changing some norms or laws. Examples of such a movement would include a trade union with a goal of increasing workers rights, a green movement advocating a set of ecological laws, or a movement supporting introduction of a capital punishment or the right to abortion. Some reform movements may aim for a change in custom and moral norms, such as condemnation of pornography or proliferation of some religion.
  • radical movement - movements dedicated to changing value systems in a fundamental way. Examples would include the American Civil Rights Movement which demanded full civil rights and equality under the law to all Americans, regardless of race; the Polish Solidarity (Solidarność) movement which demanded the transformation of a Stalinist political and economic system into a democracy; or the South African shack dwellers' movement Abahlali baseMjondolo which demands the full inclusion of shack dwellers into the life of cities.
• Type of change:
  • innovation movement - movements which want to introduce or change particular norms, values, etc. The singularitarianism movement advocating deliberate action to effect and ensure the safety of the technological singularity is an example of an innovation movement.
  • conservative movement - movements which want to preserve existing norms, values, etc. For example, the anti-technology 19th century Luddites movement or the modern movement opposing the spread of the genetically modified food could be seen as conservative movements in that they aimed to fight specific technological changes.
• Targets:
  • group-focus movements - focused on affecting groups or society in general, for example, advocating the change of the political system. Some of these groups transform into or join a political party, but many remain outside the reformist party political system.
  • individual-focused movements - focused on affecting individuals. Most religious movements would fall under this category.
• Methods of work:
  • peaceful movements - various movements which use nonviolent means of protest as part of a campaign of nonviolent resistance, also often called civil resistance. The American Civil Rights movement, Polish Solidarity movement or the nonviolent, civil disobedience-orientated wing of the Indian independence movement would fall into this category.^[6]
  • violent movements - various movements which resort to violence; they are usually armed and in extreme cases can take a form of a paramilitary or terrorist organization. Examples: the Rote Armee Fraktion, Al-Qaida.
• Old and new:
  • old movements - movements for change have existed for many centuries. Most of the oldest recognized movements, dating to late 18th and 19th centuries, fought for specific social groups, such as the working class, peasants, whites, aristocrats, Protestants, men. They were usually centered around some materialistic goals like improving the standard of living or, for example, the political autonomy of the working class.
  • new movements - movements which became dominant from the second half of the 20th century - like the feminist movement, pro-choice movement, civil rights movement, environmental movement, free software movement, gay rights movement, peace movement, anti-nuclear movement, alter-globalization movement, etc. Sometimes they are known as new social movements. They are usually centered around issues that go beyond but are not separate from class.
• Range:
  • global movements - social movements with global (transnational) objectives and goals. Movements such as the first (where Marx and Bakunin met), second, third and fourth internationals, the World Social Forum, the Peoples' Global Action and the anarchist movement seek to change society at a global level.
  • local movements - most of the social movements have a local scope.^[7] They are focused on local or regional objectives, such as protecting a specific natural area, lobbying for the lowering of tolls in a certain motorway, or preserving a building about to be demolished for gentrification and turning it into a social center.

Identification of supporters[link]

A difficulty for scholarship of movements is that for most of them, neither insiders to a movement nor outsiders apply consistent labels or even descriptive phrases. Unless there is a single leader who does that, or a formal system of membership agreements, activists will typically use diverse labels and descriptive phrases that require scholars to discern when they are referring to the same or similar ideas, declare similar goals, adopt similar programs of action, and use similar methods. There can be great differences in the way that is done, to recognize who is and who is not a member or an allied group:

• Insiders: Often exaggerate the level of support by considering people supporters whose level of activity or support is weak, but also reject those that outsiders might consider supporters because they discredit the cause, or are even seen as adversaries.
• Outsiders: Those not supporters who may tend to either underestimate or overestimate the level or support or activity of elements of a movement, by including or excluding those that insiders would exclude or include.

It is often outsiders rather than insiders that apply the identifying labels for a movement, which the insiders then may or may not adopt and use to self-identify. For example, the label for the levellers political movement in 17th century England was applied to them by their antagonists, as a term of disparagement. Yet admirers of the movement and its aims later came to use the term, and it is the term by which they are known to history.

Caution must always be exercised in any discussion of amorphous phenomena such as movements to distinguish between the views of insiders and outsiders, supporters and antagonists, each of whom may have their own purposes and agendas in characterization or mischaracterization of it.

Dynamics of social movements[link]

Stages of social movements.^[8]

Social movements are not eternal. They have a life cycle: they are created, they grow, they achieve successes or failures and eventually, they dissolve and cease to exist.

They are more likely to evolve in the time and place which is friendly to the social movements: hence their evident symbiosis with the 19th century proliferation of ideas like individual rights, freedom of speech and civil disobedience. Social movements occur in liberal and authoritarian societies but in different forms. However there must always be polarizing differences between groups of people: in case of 'old movements', they were the poverty and wealth gaps. In case of the 'new movements', they are more likely to be the differences in customs, ethics and values. Finally, the birth of a social movement needs what sociologist Neil Smelser calls an initiating event: a particular, individual event that will begin a chain reaction of events in the given society leading to the creation of a social movement. For example, American Civil Rights movement grew on the reaction to black woman, Rosa Parks, riding in the whites-only section of the bus (although she was not acting alone or spontaneously—typically activist leaders lay the groundwork behind the scenes of interventions designed to spark a movement). The Polish Solidarity movement, which eventually toppled the communist regimes of Eastern Europe, developed after trade union activist Anna Walentynowicz was fired from work. The South African shack dwellers' movement Abahlali baseMjondolo grew out of a road blockade in response to the sudden selling off of a small piece of land promised for housing to a developer. Such an event is also described as a volcanic model - a social movement is often created after a large number of people realize that there are others sharing the same value and desire for a particular social change.

One of the main difficulties facing the emerging social movement is spreading the very knowledge that it exists. Second is overcoming the free rider problem - convincing people to join it, instead of following the mentality 'why should I trouble myself when others can do it and I can just reap the benefits after their hard work'.

Many social movements are created around some charismatic leader, i.e. one possessing charismatic authority. After the social movement is created, there are two likely phases of recruitment. The first phase will gather the people deeply interested in the primary goal and ideal of the movement. The second phase, which will usually come after the given movement had some successes and is trendy; it would look good on a résumé. People who join in this second phase will likely be the first to leave when the movement suffers any setbacks and failures.

Eventually, the social crisis can be encouraged by outside elements, like opposition from government or other movements. However, many movements had survived a failure crisis, being revived by some hardcore activists even after several decades.

Social movement theories[link]

Sociologists have developed several theories related to social movements [Kendall, 2005]. Some of the better-known approaches are outlined below. Chronologically they include:

• collective behavior/collective action theories (1950s)
• relative deprivation theory (1960s)
• marxist theory (1880s)
• value-added theory (1960s)
• resource mobilization (1970s)
• frame analysis theory (1980s) (closely related to social constructionist theory)
• new social movement theory (1980s)
• political process theory (1980s)

Deprivation theory[link]

Deprivation theory argues that social movements have their foundations among people who feel deprived of some good(s) or resource(s). According to this approach, individuals who are lacking some good, service, or comfort are more likely to organize a social movement to improve (or defend) their conditions.^[9]

There are two significant problems with this theory. First, since most people feel deprived at one level or another almost all the time, the theory has a hard time explaining why the groups that form social movements do when other people are also deprived. Second, the reasoning behind this theory is circular - often the only evidence for deprivation is the social movement. If deprivation is claimed to be the cause but the only evidence for such is the movement, the reasoning is circular.^[10]

Marxist theory[link]

Derived from Karl Marx, Marxism as an ideology and theory of social change has had an immense impact on the practice and the analysis of social movements. Marxism arose from an analysis of movements structured by conflicts between industrial workers and their capitalist employers in the 19th century. In the twentieth century a variety of neo-Marxist theories have been developed that have opened themselves to adding questions of race, gender, environment, and other issues to an analysis centered in (shifting) political economic conditions. Class-based movements, both revolutionary and labor-reformist, have always been stronger in Europe than in the US and so has Marxist theory as a tool for understanding social movements, but important Marxist movements and theories have also evolved in the US. Marxist approaches have been and remain influential ways of understanding the role of political economy and class differences as key forces in many historical and current social movements, and they continue to challenge approaches that are limited by their inability to imagine serious alternatives to consumer capitalist social structures.

Mass society theory[link]

Mass society theory argues that social movements are made up of individuals in large societies who feel insignificant or socially detached. Social movements, according to this theory, provide a sense of empowerment and belonging that the movement members would otherwise not have.^[11]

Very little support has been found for this theory. Aho (1990), in his study of Idaho Christian Patriotism, did not find that members of that movement were more likely to have been socially detached. In fact, the key to joining the movement was having a friend or associate who was a member of the movement.

Structural strain theory[link]

Social strain theory, also known as value-added theory, proposes six factors that encourage social movement development:^[12]

1. structural conduciveness - people come to believe their society has problems
2. structural strain - people experience deprivation
3. growth and spread of a solution - a solution to the problems people are experiencing is proposed and spreads
4. precipitating factors - discontent usually requires a catalyst (often a specific event) to turn it into a social movement
5. lack of social control - the entity that is to be changed must be at least somewhat open to the change; if the social movement is quickly and powerfully repressed, it may never materialize
6. mobilization - this is the actual organizing and active component of the movement; people do what needs to be done

This theory is also subject to circular reasoning as it incorporates, at least in part, deprivation theory and relies upon it, and social/structural strain for the underlying motivation of social movement activism. However, social movement activism is, like in the case of deprivation theory, often the only indication that there was strain or deprivation.

Resource mobilization theory[link]

Resource mobilization theory emphasizes the importance of resources in social movement development and success. Resources are understood here to include: knowledge, money, media, labor, solidarity, legitimacy, and internal and external support from power elite. The theory argues that social movements develop when individuals with grievances are able to mobilize sufficient resources to take action. The emphasis on resources offers an explanation why some discontented/deprived individuals are able to organize while others are not.

Some of the assumptions of the theory include:

• there will always be grounds for protest in modern, politically pluralistic societies because there is constant discontent (i.e., grievances or deprivation); this de-emphasizes the importance of these factors as it makes them ubiquitous
• actors are rational; they weigh the costs and benefits from movement participation
• members are recruited through networks; commitment is maintained by building a collective identity and continuing to nurture interpersonal relationships
• movement organization is contingent upon the aggregation of resources
• social movement organizations require resources and continuity of leadership
• social movement entrepreneurs and protest organizations are the catalysts which transform collective discontent into social movements; social movement organizations form the backbone of social movements
• the form of the resources shapes the activities of the movement (e.g., access to a TV station will result in the extensive use TV media)
• movements develop in contingent opportunity structures that influence their efforts to mobilize; as each movement's response to the opportunity structures depends on the movement's organization and resources, there is no clear pattern of movement development nor are specific movement techniques or methods universal

Critics of this theory argue that there is too much of an emphasize on resources, especially financial resources. Some movements are effective without an influx of money and are more dependent upon the movement members for time and labor (e.g., the civil rights movement in the U.S.).

Political process theory[link]

Political process theory is similar to resource mobilization in many regards, but tends to emphasize a different component of social structure that is important for social movement development: political opportunities. Political process theory argues that there are three vital components for movement formation: insurgent consciousness, organizational strength, and political opportunities.

Insurgent consciousness refers back to the ideas of deprivation and grievances. The idea is that certain members of society feel like they are being mistreated or that somehow the system is unjust. The insurgent consciousness is the collective sense of injustice that movement members (or potential movement members) feel and serves as the motivation for movement organization.

Photo taken at the 2005 U.S. Presidential inauguration protest.

Organizational strength falls inline with resource-mobilization theory, arguing that in order for a social movement to organize it must have strong leadership and sufficient resources.

Political opportunity refers to the receptivity or vulnerability of the existing political system to challenge. This vulnerability can be the result of any of the following (or a combination thereof):

• growth of political pluralism
• decline in effectiveness of repression
• elite disunity; the leading factions are internally fragmented
• a broadening of access to institutional participation in political processes
• support of organized opposition by elites

One of the advantages of the political process theory is that it addresses the issue of timing or emergence of social movements. Some groups may have the insurgent consciousness and resources to mobilize, but because political opportunities are closed, they will not have any success. The theory, then, argues that all three of these components are important.

Critics of the political process theory and resource-mobilization theory point out that neither theory discusses movement culture to any great degree. This has presented culture theorists an opportunity to expound on the importance of culture.

One advance on the political process theory is the political mediation model, which outlines the way in which the political context facing movement actors intersects with the strategic choices that movements make. An additional strength of this model is that it can look at the outcomes of social movements not only in terms of success or failure but also in terms of consequences (whether intentional or unintentional, positive or negative) and in terms of collective benefits.

Culture theory[link]

More recent strains of theory understand social movements through their cultures - collectively shared beliefs, ideologies, values and other meanings about the world. These include explorations into the "collective identities" and "collective action frames" of movements and movement organizations.

Culture theory builds upon both the political process and resource-mobilization theories but extends them in two ways. First, it emphasizes the importance of movement culture. Second, it attempts to address the free-rider problem.

Both resource-mobilization theory and political process theory include a sense of injustice in their approaches. Culture theory brings this sense of injustice to the forefront of movement creation by arguing that, in order for social movements to successfully mobilize individuals, they must develop an injustice frame. An injustice frame is a collection of ideas and symbols that illustrate both how significant the problem is as well as what the movement can do to alleviate it,

"Like a picture frame, an issue frame marks off some part of the world. Like a building frame, it holds things together. It provides coherence to an array of symbols, images, and arguments, linking them through an underlying organizing idea that suggests what is essential - what consequences and values are at stake. We do not see the frame directly, but infer its presence by its characteristic expressions and language. Each frame gives the advantage to certain ways of talking and thinking, while it places others out of the picture."^[13]

Important characteristics of the injustice frames include:^[14]

• Facts take on their meaning by being embedded in frames, which render them relevant and significant or irrelevant and trivial.
• People carry around multiple frames in their heads.
• Successful reframing involves the ability to enter into the worldview of our adversaries.
• All frames contain implicit or explicit appeals to moral principles.

In emphasizing the injustice frame, culture theory also addresses the free-rider problem. The free-rider problem refers to the idea that people will not be motivated to participate in a social movement that will use up their personal resources (e.g., time, money, etc.) if they can still receive the benefits without participating. In other words, if person X knows that movement Y is working to improve environmental conditions in his neighborhood, he is presented with a choice: join or not join the movement. If he believes the movement will succeed without him, he can avoid participation in the movement, save his resources, and still reap the benefits - this is free-riding. A significant problem for social movement theory has been to explain why people join movements if they believe the movement can/will succeed without their contribution. Culture theory argues that, in conjunction with social networks being an important contact tool, the injustice frame will provide the motivation for people to contribute to the movement.

Framing processes includes three separate components:

• Diagnostic frame: the movement organization frames what is the problem or what they are critiquing
• Prognostic frame: the movement organization frames what is the desirable solution to the problem
• Motivational frame: the movement organization frames a "call to arms" by suggesting and encouraging that people take action to solve the problem

Social movement and social networking[link]

Many discussions have been generated recently on the topic of social networking and the effect it may play on the formation and mobilization of social movement.^[15] For example, the emergence of the Coffee Party first appeared on the social networking site, Facebook. The party has continued to gather membership and support through that site and file sharing sites, such as Flickr. The 2009–2010 Iranian election protests also demonstrated how social networking sites are making the mobilization of large numbers of people quicker and easier. Iranians were able to organize and speak out against the election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad by using sites such as Twitter and Facebook. This in turn prompted widespread government censorship of the web and social networking sites.

The sociological study of social movements is quite new. The traditional view of movements often perceived them as chaotic and disorganized, treating activism as a threat to the social order. The activism experienced in the 1960s and 1970s shuffled in a new world opinion about the subject. Models were now introduced to understand the organizational and structural powers embedded in social movements.

See also[link]

• Anti-jock movement
• Civil resistance
• Countermovement
• Global citizens movement
• List of social movements
• Moral shocks
• Nonviolent resistance
• Political movement
• Reform movement
• Revolutionary movement
• Social defence
• Social equality
• Teaching for social justice
• Union organizer

Notes[link]

References[link]

• David F. Aberle 1966. The Peyote Religion among the Navaho. Chicago: Aldine. ISBN 0-8061-2382-6
• James Alfred Aho. 1990. Politics of Righteousness: Idaho Christian Patriotism. Washington: University of Washington Press. ISBN 0-295-96997-0
• Herbert G. Blumer 1969. "Collective Behavior." In Alfred McClung Lee, ed., Principles of Sociology. Third Edition. New York: Barnes and Noble Books, pp. 65–121.
• Mark Chaves. 1997. Ordaining Women: Culture and Conflict in Religious Organizations. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. ISBN 0-674-64146-9
• Graeme Chesters, & Ian Welsh. Complexity and Social Movements: Multitudes at the Edge of Chaos Routledge 2006. ISBN 0-415-43974-4
• Mario Diani and Doug McAdam, Social movements and networks, Oxford University Press, 2003.
• Susan Eckstei, ed. Power and Popular Protest: Latin American Social Movements, Updated Edition, University of California Press 2001. ISBN 0-520-22705-0
• Anthony Giddens. 1985. The Nation-State and Violence. Cambridge, England: Polity Press. ISBN 0-520-06039-3
• J. Craig Jenkins and Charles Perrow. 1977. Insurgency of the Powerless Farm Worker Movements (1946–1972). American Sociological Review. 42(2):249-268.
• Diana Kendall, Sociology In Our Times, Thomson Wadsworth, 2005. ISBN 0-534-64629-8
• William Kornhauser. 1959. The Politics of Mass Society. New York: Free Press. ISBN 0-02-917620-4
• Donna Maurer. 2002. Vegetarianism: Movement or Moment? Philadelphia: Temple University Press. ISBN 1-56639-936-X
• Armand L. Mauss. 1975. Social Problems of Social Movements. Philadelphia: Lippincott.
• Denton E. Morrison. 1978. "Some Notes toward Theory on Relative Deprivation, Social Movements, and Social Change." In Louis E. Genevie, ed., Collective Behavior and Social Movements. Itasca, Ill.: Peacock. pp. 202–209.
• Immanuel Ness, ed. Encyclopedia of American Social Movements, 2004. ISBN 0-7656-8045-9.
• Adam Roberts and Timothy Garton Ash (eds.), Civil Resistance and Power Politics: The Experience of Non-violent Action from Gandhi to the Present, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. ISBN 978-0-19-955201-6. [2]
• Charlotte Ryan and William W. Gamson, The Art of Reframing Political Debates. Contexts. 2006; 5(1):13-18.
• Neil J. Smelser, 1962. Theory of Collective Behavior. New York: Free Press. ISBN 0-02-929390-1
• David Snow, Sarah A. Soule and Hanspeter Kriesi, ed. Blackwell Companion to Social Movements, Blackwell, 2004.
• Suzanne Staggenborg, Social Movements, Oxford University Press, 2008. ISBN 978-0-19-542309-9
• Sidney Tarrow, Power in Movement: Collective Action, Social Movements and Politics, Cambridge University Press, 1994. ISBN 0-521-42271-X
• Charles Tilly, 1978. From Mobilization to Revolution. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley, 1978.
• Charles Tilly, Social Movements, 1768–2004, Boulder, CO, Paradigm Publishers, 2004 262 pp. ISBN 1-59451-042-3 (hardback) / ISBN 1-59451-043-1 (paperback)
• "Draft:Social Movements." - TriasWiki. Web. 23 Feb. 2012. <http://wiki.triastelematica.org/index.php/Draft:Social_movements>
• "Dictionary - Definition of Social Movement." Webster's Online Dictionary. Web. 23 Feb. 2012. <http://www.websters-online-dictionary.org/definitions/Social%20Movement>.
• "Sociology of Religion." Social Movement Theory and the : Toward a New Synthesis. Web. 23 Feb. 2012. <http://socrel.oxfordjournals.org/content/52/4/311.abstract>.
• "GSDRC: Display." GSDRC: Governance and Social Development Resource Centre. Web. 23 Feb. 2012. <http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display>
• "SOCIAL MOVEMENT THEORIES." Web. 23 Feb. 2012. <http://stmarys.ca/~evanderveen/wvdv/social_change/social_movement_theories.htm>
• "Trent University :: Theory, Culture and Politics." Trent University. Web. 23 Feb. 2012. <http://www.trentu.ca/theorycentre/>
• "Resource Mobilization and New Social Theory." University of Victoria. Web. 23 Feb. 2012. <http://web.uvic.ca/~stucraw/Lethbridge/MyArticles/ResourceMobilization.htm>
• "Structural Strain Theories." Structural Strain Theories. Web. 23 Feb. 2012. <http://www.umsl.edu/~keelr/200/strain.html>.

Further reading[link]

• Marco G. Giugni, How Social Movements Matter, University of Minnesota Press, 1999, ISBN 0-8166-2914-5
• Rod Bantjes, Social Movements in a Global Context, CSPI, 2007, ISBN 978-1-55130-324-6
• Michael Barker, Conform or Reform? Social Movements and the Mass Media, Fifth-Estate-Online - International Journal of Radical Mass Media Criticism. February 2007. Fith-estate-online.co.uk
• Dennis Chong, "Collective Action and the Civil Rights Movement", University of Chicago Press, 1991, ISBN 978-0-226-10441-6

External links[link]

• ASA section on Collective Behavior and Social Movements
• Interface: a Journal For and About Social Movements
• RevolutionArt Movement
• Social Movements: A Summary of What Works (pdf)

Doug McAdam

Doug McAdam (Ph.D. 1979) is Professor of Sociology at Stanford University. He is the author or co-author of over a dozen books and over fifty articles, and is widely credited as one of the pioneers of the political process model in social movement analysis.^{[citation needed]} He wrote one of the first books on the theory in 1982 when analyzing the U.S. civil rights movement: Political Process and the Development of the Black Insurgency 1930-1970. His other book Freedom Summer won the C. Wright Mills Award in 1990. He served as the director of the prestigious Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences between 2001 and 2005. He was elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2003.

Works[link]

This list is incomplete; you can help by expanding it.

• Gerald Davis, Doug McAdam, W. Richard Scott, and Mayer N. Zald (eds.). 2005. Social Movements and Organizations. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Mario Diani and Doug McAdam (eds.). 2003. Social Movements and Networks: Relational Approaches to Collective Action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Dynamics of Contention. 2001. Cambridge University Press. (with Sidney Tarrow and Charles Tilly).
• Political Process and the Development of Black Insurgency, 1930-1970. (2nd Edition). 1999. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0-226-55553-9
• Freedom Summer. 1988. Oxford University Press.

External links[link]

• Home page at Stanford

This biography of an American sociologist is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. v t e

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (March 2007)

The Crisis

First Issue of The Crisis: A Record of the Darker Races, November 1910. New York: NAACP, 1910
Editor	W.E.B. Du Bois
Staff writers	Oswald Garrison Villard, J. Max Barber, Charles Edward Russell, Kelly Miller, W.S. Braithwaite, M. D. Maclean
Monthly[1]
Publisher	NAACP
First issue	November 1910 (1910-November)
Company	The Crisis Publishing Company
Country	United States
Based in	New York, NY
Language	English
Website	www.thecrisismagazine.com
ISSN	1559-1573

The Crisis is the official magazine of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), and was founded in 1910 by W. E. B. Du Bois (editor), Oswald Garrison Villard, J. Max Barber, Charles Edward Russell, Kelly Miller, W.S. Braithwaite, M. D. Maclean.^[2]

The original title of the journal was The Crisis: A Record of The Darker Races. From 1997 to 2003, it appeared as The New Crisis: The Magazine of Opportunities and Ideas, but the title has since reverted to The Crisis. The title derives from the poem "The Present Crisis" by James Russell Lowell.^[1] Published monthly, by 1920 its circulation had reached 100,000 copies. Du Bois proclaimed his intentions in his first editorial:

The object of this publication is to set forth those facts and arguments which show the danger of race prejudice, particularly as manifested today toward colored people. It takes its name from the fact that the editors believe that this is a critical time in the history of the advancement of men. …Finally, its editorial page will stand for the rights of men, irrespective of color or race, for the highest ideals of American democracy, and for reasonable but earnest and persistent attempts to gain these rights and realize these ideals.^[3]

Predominantly a current-affairs journal, The Crisis also included poems, reviews, and essays on culture and history. Du Bois' initial position as editor was in line with the NAACP's liberal programme of social reform and racial equality, but by the 1930s Du Bois was advocating a form of black separatism. This led to disputes between Du Bois and the NAACP resulting in his resignation as editor in 1934. He was replaced by Roy Wilkins.

Although The Crisis was officially an organ of the NAACP, Du Bois had a large degree of control over the periodicals expressed opinion. Du Bois wrote in Dusk of Dawn that he intended for The Crisis to represent his personal opinions:

I determine to make the opinion of the Crisis a personal opinion; because, as I argued, no organization can express definite and clear cut opinions… the Crisis would state openly the opinion of its editor, so long, of course, as that opinion was in general agreement with that of the organization.

Du Bois contends that the periodical suffered during the Great Depression as the "circulation dropped steadily until by 1933 it was scarcely more than ten thousand paid subscriptions." Du Bois left the magazine for both financial and ideological reasons.

Throughout the Du Bois years The Crisis published the work of many young African American writers associated with the Harlem Renaissance. Its greatest era as a literary journal was between 1919 and 1926, when Jessie Redmon Fauset was literary editor. Fauset encouraged such writers as Arna Bontemps, Langston Hughes, Countee Cullen and Jean Toomer.

Following the departure of Fauset and Du Bois, the influence of The Crisis declined. The magazine was unable to sustain the high literary standards it had achieved under Fauset, but it continued to have a powerful political voice.

References[link]

A 1911 copy of The Crisis depicting "Ra-Maat-Neb, one of the black kings of the Upper Nile", a copy of the relief of Nebmaatre I on Meroe pyramid 17.

Du Bois, WEB (1940), Dusk of Dawn, Library of America, ISBN [[Special:BookSources/97809400450332|97809400450332]] .

Partington, Paul, The Moon Illustrated Weekly: Black America's First Weekly Magazine, ISBN 978-0-9602538-2-1 .

External links[link]

• The Crisis, http://www.thecrisismagazine.com/ .
• History, NAACP, http://www.naacp.org/about/history/ .
• The Crisis, Footnote, January 1918, http://www.footnote.com/browsemore/179488128_Boom%20and%20Bust:%201920-1935/ .
• The Crisis, Books, Google, http://www.google.com/search?tbs=bks%3A1&tbo=1&q=The+Crisis+Magazine&btnG=Search+Books#q=The+Crisis+Magazine&hl=en&tbo=1&tbs=bks:1,bkt:m&source=lnt&sa=X&ei=TrrMTILMLJG4sQPMn9CPDg&ved=0CBMQpwU&fp=fd2e97bdff999388 .
• The Crisis, 1, 10–23, The Modernist Journals Project, Nov. 1910 – Apr. 1911, May 1915 – Apr. 1922, http://www.modjourn.org/render.php?view=mjp_object&id=crisiscollection .

David Graeber
Born	(1961-02-12) February 12, 1961 (age 51)
Residence	London, United Kingdom
Citizenship	United States
Fields	anthropology
Institutions	Yale University Goldsmiths, University of London
Alma mater	State University of New York at Purchase University of Chicago
Influences	Edmund Leach, Marshall Sahlins
Influenced	Occupy movement

David Rolfe Graeber (born 12 February 1961) is an American anthropologist and anarchist who is Reader in Social Anthropology at Goldsmiths, University of London.^[1] He was an associate professor of anthropology at Yale University, although Yale controversially declined to rehire him,^[2] and his term there ended in June 2007. Graeber has been involved in social and political activism, including the protests against the World Economic Forum in New York City in 2002 and Occupy Wall Street. He is a member of the labor union Industrial Workers of the World and of the Interim Committee for the emerging International Organization for a Participatory Society.^[3]

Early life[link]

Graeber's parents, who were in their forties when Graeber was born, were self-taught working-class intellectuals. Graeber's mother, Ruth Rubenstein, had been a garment worker, and played the lead role in the 1930s musical comedy revue Pins & Needles, staged by the International Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union.^[4] Graeber's father Kenneth, who was affiliated with the Youth Communist League, participated in the Spanish Revolution in Barcelona and fought in the Spanish Civil War.^[5] He later worked as a plate stripper on offset printers. Graeber grew up in New York, in a cooperative apartment building described by Business Week magazine as "suffused with radical politics."^[6] Graeber has been an anarchist since the age of 16, according to an interview he gave to The Village Voice in 2005.^[7]

Graeber graduated from Phillips Academy Andover in 1978 and received his B.A. from the State University of New York at Purchase in 1984. He gained his Masters degree and Doctorate at the University of Chicago, where he won a Fulbright fellowship and completed his Ph.D. thesis on magic, slavery, and politics in Madagascar.^[2]

Academic career[link]

Graeber in January 2002

In 1998, two years after completing his PhD, Graeber joined Yale University as an assistant professor.^[2] In May 2005, the Yale anthropology department decided not to renew Graeber's contract, preventing him from coming up for consideration for tenure as he would otherwise have been scheduled to do in 2008. Pointing to Graeber's highly regarded anthropological scholarship, his supporters (including fellow anthropologists, former students, and activists) accused the decision of being politically motivated. More than 4,500 people signed petitions supporting him, and well-known British anthropologist Maurice Bloch called for Yale to rescind its decision.^[2] Bloch, who had been a professor of anthropology at the London School of Economics and the Collège de France, and world renowned scholar on Madagascar, made the following statement about Graeber in a letter to the university:

"His writings on anthropological theory are outstanding. I consider him the best anthropological theorist of his generation from anywhere in the world."^[8]

The Yale administration argued that Graeber's dismissal was in keeping with Yale's policy of granting tenure to few junior faculty and Yale gave no formal explanation for its actions. Graeber has suggested that his support of a student of his who was targeted for expulsion because of her membership in GESO, Yale's graduate student union, may have played a role in the university's decision.^{[9][2][10][11]}

In December 2005, Graeber agreed to leave the university after a one-year paid sabbatical. That spring he taught two final classes: an introduction to cultural anthropology (attended by over 200 students) and a course entitled “Direct Action and Radical Social Theory” – the only explicitly radical-themed course at Yale he ever taught.

On 25 May 2006, Graeber was invited to give the Malinowski Lecture at the London School of Economics; his address was entitled "Beyond Power/Knowledge: an exploration of the relation of power, ignorance and stupidity".^[12] The anthropology department at the university honors an anthropologist at a relatively early stage of their career to give the Malinowski Lecture each year, and only invite those who are considered to have made a significant contribution to anthropological theory. That same year, Graeber was asked to present the keynote address in the 100th anniversary Diamond Jubilee meetings of the Association of Social Anthropologists.^[13] In April 2011 he presented the anthropology department's annual Distinguished Lecture at Berkeley.^[14]

Authorship[link]

David Graeber is the author of Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology and Towards an Anthropological Theory of Value: The False Coin of Our Own Dreams. He has done extensive anthropological work in Madagascar, writing his doctoral thesis (The Disastrous Ordeal of 1987: Memory and Violence in Rural Madagascar) on the continuing social division between the descendants of nobles and the descendants of former slaves. A book based on his dissertation, Lost People: Magic and the Legacy of Slavery in Madagascar appeared from Indiana University Press in September 2007. A book of collected essays, Possibilities: Essays on Hierarchy, Rebellion, and Desire was published by AK Press in November 2007 and Direct Action: An Ethnography appeared from the same press in August 2009, as well as a collection of essays co-edited with Stevphen Shukaitis called “Constituent Imagination: Militant Investigations//Collective Theorization” (AK Press, May 2007). These were followed by a major historical monograph, Debt: the First Five Thousand Years (Melville House), which appeared in July 2011.^[15] As of December 2011^[update], Graeber is working on a book for Random House connecting "the story of the Occupy movement to an exploration of the past and future of direct action, participatory democracy, and political transformation", and another for Melville House combining two essays on bureaucracy (one of which he delivered as the Malinowski Lecture in 2006).^[16]

Activism[link]

Graeber (left) at a rally for immigrant rights at Union Square, New York City in May 2007

In addition to his academic work, Graeber has a history of both direct and indirect involvement in political activism, including membership in the labor union Industrial Workers of the World, a role in protests against the World Economic Forum in New York City in 2002, support for the 2010 UK student protests,^[17] and an early role in the Occupy Wall Street movement. He is co-founder of the Anti-Capitalist Convergence.^[18] In November 2011, Rolling Stone magazine credited Graeber with giving the Occupy Wall Street movement its theme: "We are the 99 percent." Rolling Stone says Graeber helped create the first New York City General Assembly, with only 60 participants, on August 2.^[19] He spent the next six weeks involved with the burgeoning movement, including facilitating general assemblies, attending working group meetings, and organizing legal and medical training and classes on nonviolent resistance. A few days after the encampment of Zuccotti Park began, he left New York for Austin, Texas.^[6]

Graeber has argued that the Occupy Wall Street movement's lack of recognition of the legitimacy of either existing political institutions or the legal structure, its embrace of non-hierarchical consensus decision-making and of prefigurative politics make it a fundamentally anarchist project.^[20] Comparing it to the Arab Spring, Graeber has claimed that Occupy Wall Street and other contemporary grassroots protests represent "the opening salvo in a wave of negotiations over the dissolution of the American Empire."^[21]

Publications[link]

Books[link]

• — (2001). Toward an anthropological theory of value: the false coin of our own dreams. New York: Palgrave. ISBN 978-0-312-24044-8. OCLC 46822270. 
• — (2004). Fragments of an anarchist anthropology. Chicago: Prickly Paradigm Press (distributed by University of Chicago Press). ISBN 978-0-9728196-4-0. OCLC 55221090. 
• — (2007). Lost people: magic and the legacy of slavery in Madagascar. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. ISBN 978-0-253-34910-1. OCLC 82367869. 
• — (2007). Possibilities: essays on hierarchy, rebellion, and desire. Oakland, CA: AK Press. ISBN 978-1-904859-66-6. OCLC 154704091. 
• — (2009). Direct action: an ethnography. Edinburgh Oakland: AK Press. ISBN 978-1-904859-79-6. OCLC 182529207. 
• — (2011). Debt: the first 5,000 years. Brooklyn, N.Y: Melville House. ISBN 978-1-933633-86-2. OCLC 426794447. 
• — (2011). Revolutions in reverse. London New York: Minor Compositions. ISBN 978-1-57027-243-1. OCLC 759171790. 

As co-editor

• — (2007). Constituent imagination: militant investigations/collective theorization. Oakland, CA: AK Press. ISBN 978-1-904859-35-2. OCLC 141193537. 

Articles[link]

• — (December 27, 1998). "Rebel Without A God". In These Times. http://penseenoir.wordpress.com/2008/11/26/rebel-without-a-god-the-anti-authoritarian-attributes-of-buffy-the-vampire-slayer/. Retrieved February 15, 2012.  A meditation on the anti-authoritarian elements of Buffy the Vampire Slayer
• — (August 21, 2000). "Give it Away". In These Times 24, (19). http://www.inthesetimes.com/issue/24/19/graeber2419.html. Retrieved February 15, 2012.  An article about the French intellectual Marcel Mauss
• — (January-February 2002). "The New Anarchists". New Left Review (13). Archived from the original on January 30, 2010. http://web.archive.org/web/20100130062023/http://newleftreview.org/A2368. Retrieved February 15, 2012. 
• — (June 1, 2003). "The Twilight of Vanguardism". Indymedia DC. http://dc.indymedia.org/newswire/display/71522/index.php. Retrieved February 15, 2012.  An essay originally delivered as a keynote address during the "History Matters: Social Movements Past, Present, and Future" conference at the New School for Social Research on May 3rd, 2003
• — (January 06, 2004). "Anarchism in the 21st Century". Z Magazine. http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=41&ItemID=4796. Retrieved February 15, 2011.  Co-authored with Andrej Grubacic
• — (December 6, 2005). On the phenomenology of giant puppets: broken windows, imaginary jars of urine, and the cosmological role of the police in American culture. http://www.libcom.org/files/puppets.pdf. Retrieved February 15, 2012.  Originally an address to Anthropology, Art and Activism Seminar Series at Brown University's Watson Institute, December 6, 2005
• — (March 2006). "Transformation of Slavery Turning Modes of Production Inside Out: Or, Why Capitalism is a Transformation of Slavery". Critique of Anthropology 26 (1): 61–85. DOI:10.1177/0308275X06061484. http://www.faculty.fairfield.edu/dcrawford/graeber_2006a.pdf. Retrieved February 15, 2012. 
• — (January 2007). "Army of Altruists". Harper's. http://harpers.org/archive/2007/01/0081344. Retrieved February 15, 2012.  An attempt to solve the riddle of why so many working class Americans vote right-wing
• — (October 12, 2007). "The Shock of Victory". Infoshop News. http://news.infoshop.org/article.php?story=2007graeber-victory. Retrieved February 15, 2012. 
• — (October 16, 2007). "Revolution in Reverse". Infoshop News. http://news.infoshop.org/article.php?story=2007graeber-revolution-reverse. Retrieved February 15, 2012. 
• — (April 1, 2008). "The Sadness of Post-Workerism, or, "Art and Immaterial Labour" Conference: a Sort of Review". The Commoner. http://www.commoner.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/graeber_sadness.pdf. Retrieved February 15, 2012.  An assessment of recent trendy autonomist theory (à la Negri, Lazzarato, etc.), with some comments on the relation of art, value, scams, and the fate of The Future
• — (November 17, 2008). Hope in Common. Autonomedia.org. Archived from the original on February 10, 2009. http://web.archive.org/web/20090210032906/http://slash.autonomedia.org/node/11569. Retrieved February 15, 2012. 
• — (February 10, 2009). "Debt: The First Five Thousand Years". Mute Magazine 2 (12). http://www.metamute.org/en/content/debt_the_first_five_thousand_years. Retrieved February 15, 2012. 
• — (November 2010). "Against Kamikaze Capitalism: Oil, Climate Change and the French refinery blockades". Shift. http://shiftmag.co.uk/?p=389. Retrieved February 15, 2012. 
• — (December 7, 2010). "To Have is to Owe". Triple Canopy (10). http://www.canopycanopycanopy.com/10/to_have_is_to_owe. Retrieved February 15, 2011.  An illustrated essay on the history of debt, containing excerpts from Debt: the first 5,000 years (2011)

References[link]

Further reading[link]

• Sutton, David (September 2004). "Anthropology's Value(s): A Review of David Graeber's Toward an Anthropological Theory of Value". Anthropological Theory 4 (3): 373–379. DOI:10.1177/1463499604042818. 
• Guyer, Jane I. (December 2009). "On 'possibility': A response to ‘How Is Anthropology Going?’". Anthropological Theory 9 (4): 355–370. DOI:10.1177/1463499609358143. 

External links[link]

• Academic profile at Goldsmiths, University of London
• Interview to Mark Thwaite (for Ready Steady Book)
• Works by or about David Graeber in libraries (WorldCat catalog)
• David Graeber at the Internet Movie Database
• In Conversation: World of Debt: David Graeber with Spencer Woodman, The Brooklyn Rail

Brian Holmes is a Professor of Philosophy at the European Graduate School in Saas-Fee, Switzerland,^[1] where he teaches an intensive summer seminar. He has worked with the French Graphics collective Ne Pas Plier (Do Not Bend)^[2] from 1999 to 2001. and the French cartography collective Bureau d'Etudes.^[3]

He holds a doctorate in Romance Languages and Literatures from the University of California at Berkeley, is the author of the book 'Hieroglyphs of the Future'.^[4] He was the English editor of publications for Documenta X, Kassel, Germany, 1997. Holmes gives lectures widely in Europe and North & South America, is a frequent contributor to the international mailinglist Nettime, the art magazines Springerin ^[5] (Austria) and Brumaria ^[6](Spain) and the interdisciplinary journal Multitudes (France).

In recent years, Holmes has been co-organizing a series of seminars with the New York City based reading group 16 Beaver Group under the title Continental Drift,^[7] working on the issues of geopolitics and geopoetics. He maintains a blog ^[8] under the same name ('Continental Drift') with the additional subtitle 'the other side of neoliberal globalization'.

References[link]

External links[link]

• Brian Holmes faculty profile at the European Graduate School. (Biography, bibliography, articles, and video lecture)
• Continental Drift Blog by Brian Holmes