[ RC ] Social movements don't "just happen" --what it takes for success

[BIL...@aol.com]

 Social movements don't "just happen"  --what it takes for success

 

 

The question is whether Radical Centrists, at this time, want to see RC develop

into a social movement. The answer is clear enough, some do, some don't.

 

A related question for those who do want Radical Centrism to become

an actual real-world movement is :   What is the best "model" around which

to try and organize ?

 

In what sense can an incipient movement of any kind be compared to a

high tech startup ?  Probably it can, but not universally, and it is highly unlikely

that it can except in a limited number of cases. Social movements are essentially

either political or religious in character, although sometimes they may be cultural.

Hence, while a political program or set of beliefs about values, for example, can be

compared to a product, the better comparison is to a values community.

 

Exceptions seem to be limited to such things as mobilization to promote an art style,

or a new kind of intellectual entertainment ( like the Beat movement of the late

1950s and early 1960s ), or something along the lines of self-help circles

once promoted by publications for women in which advice is given about the

advantages of small group gatherings,  to better local communities. Possibly

the PTA / PTO movement is also in this category. Some single issue

movements also belong here, maybe like temperance at one time, or

current efforts for campaign finance reform.

 

Otherwise,  social movements are better thought of as incipient political  parties

( even if they never get that far ) or incipient religions ( even if they hardly ever

go nearly that far ). That is, social movements generally have multiple goals

that relate directly to members' sense of personal identity and sense of

community, including a larger community such as all moral people,

or even "America."

 

The task, in these cases, is not selling a product but changing lives

and maybe changing the entire society. These are very

different kinds of objectives.

 

The following study is all about what works when organizing a movement.

 

Realistically, a successful movement must recognize that not everyone will be

equally interested, and certainly not equally committed.  A respected place

needs to be made explicit for those who are less committed, to show that

they are valued and anything they may do on behalf of the Cause is

sincerely appreciated.

 

Meanwhile, for those who are committed, it is essential to understand just

what is possible at a given time and what is not.  The article makes the point

that the phenomenon of creating a movement can be researched and

all kinds of useful lessons learned about what can be done, and

what kinds of obstacles to expect, and how to make the most

of both obstacles and opportunities.

 

 

Billy

May 10, 2012

 

 

 

=======================================================

 

Comments of interest to Radical Centrists are highlighted in BF in the text.

 

 

 

from :

The Citizen's Handbook: A Guide to Building Community in Vancouver
http://www.vcn.bc.ca/citizens-handbook
August 2001

 

 

 

 

 

 

Social Movements: A Summary of What Works
Charles Dobson

 

 

What affects the success of reform movements? What do the civil liberties,
feminist, environmental, gay rights, anti-nuke, gun control, don’t drink and drive,
and living wage movements have in common? Since the 1960’s a small number of
sociologists has been conducting research, trying to answer this question

.
Research-based theory on social movements complements the limited, often
personal, perspective of activists and organizers because it looks at larger
numbers of people, longer periods of time, and major shifts in popular attitudes.
At the time of this writing, little of this work has made its way out of universities.
The following is an attempt to present in simple language the resource mobilization
perspective of social movements. It summarizes and updates Doug McAdam’s,
John D. McCarthy’s, and Mayer Zald’s detailed review article, Social Movements,
published in the Handbook of Sociology, edited by Neil Smelser. (Their perspective
is distinct from the new social movement perspective linked to European
intellectuals like Jurgen Habermas, which focuses on symbolic production and
cultural conflict, with an academic mix of philosophy, political theory, and dense
intellectual discourse.)

 

 

The authors identify three factors critical to social movements: political opportunity,
organizational capacity, and framing ability. They look at social movements as
politics by other means, often the only means open to relatively powerless
challenging groups. They argue for the constancy of discontent and emphasize the
variability of resources in accounting for the emergence and development of
insurgency. A reliable model of social change, they say, must be able to account
for both micro and macro phenomena, and be able to explain not only the
emergence but the maintenance and development of social movement
organizations.

In more detail, here is what they have to say.

Favorable Pre-conditions

Individual psychology not so important

Early work on social movements assumed that activism could be explained by
examining the psychological motivations of individuals. A popular theory was that
activism came from sensing a gap between what a person felt he or she was
entitled to and what he or she, in fact received. According to resource mobilization
adherents, empirical research shows individual predispositions are at best
insufficient to account for participation in collective action.

 

 

Prosperity

Prosperity affords the resources necessary for social movements. Other things
being equal the most deprived seem unable to sustain more than momentary
insurgency. This also holds true for local politics. Neighbourhoods of

higher socioeconomic status are much better than poorer neighbourhoods

at getting concessions and services from local government.

 

 

Physical concentration

Bringing people into closer proximity in cities, factories, university campuses helps
increase the potential for social movement activity. The civil rights movement
followed the mass migration of blacks from dispersed rural settlements to
concentrated urban centres in the US South. Short-lived examples of physical
concentration also foment social change. Conferences, for instance, often energize
participants to pursue progressive change. Sports events, carnivals and rallies
have less predictable outcomes

.
Level of prior grassroots organization

The prior existence of church groups, clubs, special interest organizations, teams
and recreational groups, community groups, PTAs, veterans and educational
organizations supports the development of social movements. The early stages of
mobilization are difficult if most people lead purely private lives, and if grassroots
groups have few members. Robert Putnam’s work in Italy shows how broad public
participation and a healthy network of grassroots groups could expedite large
regional government initiatives.

 

The absence of cross-cutting solidarities

It is easier for a movement to grow in a population that is isolated or has weak ties
to other groups in society. The feminist movement encountered a good deal of
resistance from married women in the US, women who had a wide variety of
social, and economic ties to men.

Suddenly imposed grievances, dramatic spotlighting

Dramatic, highly publicized and often unexpected events can lead to public
outrage and major shifts in certain public attitudes. Huge oil spills, nuclear
accidents, revelations of serious government misconduct, official violence against
dissenters, or the sudden loss of employment serve to foment social movement.

Solidarity instead of free-riding

Many sociologists have argued that social movements are hampered by the
tendency for people to do a quick cost-benefit analysis on their own participation.
They argue the rational person will conclude the easiest course is to become a
free rider since they will obtain the benefits of social action whether they participate
or not

.
To address free rider absenteeism, smart activists emphasize solidarity, personal
relationships, and the importance of individual commitment for success. This is
much easier to do in an established organization.

 

 

 

Individual inducements

Prior contact with a movement member

Research shows the strongest inducement to activism is prior contact with a
movement member. For instance, new recruits to peace movements are typically
people who are already associated with members of peace groups

.
Membership in many organizations

Another correlate of individual activism is the number of organizations a person
belongs to. Most organizers, focus their attention on organizations, having long
recognized the difficulty of recruiting isolated individuals.

Prior activism

People who have been previously involved in some form of collective action in their
past are more likely to be involved collective action in the future. This may come
from learning the social role of activist. The longer one spends in the role of
activist, the more likely subsequent involvement will become a matter of confirming
one’s identity.

 

 

 

Emotional achievement.

People are more likely to act collectively when responding to strong emotions.
Community organizers typically try to identify an emotional issue that will motivate
people to participate. Chinese students who drove the democracy movement were
spurred by a roller coaster of strong emotions. It started with grief, and anger over
the murder of Hu Yaobang, sympathetic general secretary of the Communist Party;
continued with a heroic hunger strike accompanied by vows of self-sacrifice; and
ended with fear and hopeful exhilaration brought on by the risky defiance of martial
law, and the blockading of entrances to the city.

Music that is often central to a social movement also relies on emotion. Music
speaks to the emotions better than pictures or words. It stirs people up. Historians
frequently mention the importance of Tom Paine’s pamphlets to the American
Revolution, too often overlooking his reworking of popular folk tunes

.
Availability

Life circumstances permit or constrain participation by affecting availability. People
with full time jobs, marriage and family responsibilities are less likely to participate
in social movement activity. Autonomous individuals with few personal
responsibilities such as college students and single professionals are much more
likely participants.

 

 

The Ingredients of Micro-mobilization

Kindling in small groups

The basic building block of social movements is the small informal group
connected to a loose network. Sometimes this "micro-mobilization context" is a
group of friends, sometimes a group of coworkers, sometimes a subgroup within a
larger group like a church or a union. A well-known example is the four
Greensboro A&T students who precipitated the 60’s black sit-in movement after
“bull-sessions” in one another’s dorm rooms. Margaret Mead was quite right:
“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can

change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.”

 

 

Familiar members

Micro-mobilization contexts act as the staging ground for movements. Three
resources affect the emergence of a movement: members, leaders, and an
existing communications network. Research shows that new members appear
along established lines of interaction. New members tend to know people who are
already members. The more a person is integrated into an activist community, the
more readily he or she will be willing to take part in protest activities.

A co-optable communications network

The pattern, speed and spread of a movement depends on an existing co-optable
communications network. The women’s liberation movement was able to make
rapid progress in the 1960’s (where it had previously failed to do so) because of
the prior arrival of just such a network. Overall, the greater the number and
diversity of people actively participating in an network the more likely it will support
a mobilization effort. The network may be informal and invisible, like those
described in detail in Emanuel Rosen’s book, The Anatomy of Buzz. Rosen sees
communications networks as useful for [ promoting ] products; activists see them

as useful for spreading ideas. Activists could learn something from books on social
networks and viral marketing. Because social movements seem to spread like
other innovations, activists might also learn something from the literature on
technical and cultural diffusion, and the role of early adopters.

 

Capable leaders

Smart, honest, committed leaders are invaluable to a social movement. The
literature on activism emphasizes the importance of leaders in generating a
movement, and the importance of creating new leaders to keep it rolling.
Particularly important is the articulate and charismatic leader who can elegantly
articulate people’s concerns, and inspire an emotional response.

A Mobilizing frame

Corporations and elites, aided by corporate media, preserve the status quo by
linking problems to individual shortcomings. They blame the victim, promoting the
demobilizing view that lung cancer results from consumer choice, unemployment
from laziness, and family breakup from selfishness. A movement can build quickly

inside a homogenous and highly interactive group when people question the
blame-the-victim frame and begin to see a problem deriving from not from flawed
individuals, but from flawed public policy.

Erving Goffman originated the term “frame” to refer to an interpretive scheme that
people use to simplify and make sense of some aspect of the world. As a
mobilizing frame becomes widely shared, the chances of collective action

increase markedly.

 

Frame alignment

Frame alignment describes what happens in small informal groups that promote
social change. Movement supporters attempt to bring others around to a mobilizing
frame by providing examples and rationales that legitimize the movement. If others
buy the examples and rationale, they adjust their view of issues and events so they
are aligned with the new mobilizing frame.

According to David Snow and others, frame alignment includes frame bridging,
frame amplification, frame extension and frame transformation. Frame extension
occurs when a social movement organization extends “the boundaries of its
primary framework so as to encompass interests or points of view that are
incidental to its primary objectives but of considerable salience to potential
adherents. In effect, the movement is attempting to enlarge its adherent pool by
portraying its objectives or activities as attending to and being congruent with the
values and interests of potential adherents.”

Optimistic expectations

Any given individual is more likely to participate in a project if he or she:
Expects a large number of people to participate
Expects his/her participation will contribute to success
Expects success if many people participate.
The relentless enthusiasm of the best grassroots amateurs inspires enthusiasm
and optimism in others, even in the worst circumstances.

 

 

Movement maintenance

The need for social movement organizations

Micro-mobilization spurs collective action, but informal groups of friends, ad-hoc
committees, or loose associations of activists are not sufficient to develop or
maintain a movement. This requires organization, and what are called social
movement organizations or SMOs. Typically these “command posts of the
movement” have an office, staff, volunteers and a board of directors

Role of the SMO

The social movement organization needs to carve out a niche for itself in the larger
environment of other organizations pursuing similar objectives, as well as develop
productive relationships with media, funders, the media and government. Most
important, each SMO must figure out a way to routinize a flow of people and

money to support the ”cause”. SMOs that demand the least from members will be
the most successful in obtaining members and money. [ ? ] One variation—the
professional SMO—attempts to speak for a large constituency, but connects to
members through weak direct mail and media links.

Radical Flank Effects

Research on SMOs pursuing relatively similar goals shows the presence of
extremist groups leads to greater support for moderate groups. Funders increase
their support to moderate groups as a way of undercutting radical groups.
Moreover the presence of more extreme groups alters the definition of middle,
making former radicals seem merely progressive. To secure their place, the new
moderates have to denounce the actions of their extremist counterparts as
irresponsible, immoral, and counterproductive. The most astute will quietly
encourage "responsible extremism" at the same time.

 

 

Government control through regulation, intimidation and cooptation

The modern state usually defends elite interests and resists social movement. It
does so though tax policies; laws affecting boycott, strikes and blockades; strategic
withholding of funds; denial of non-profit charity status; police intimidation; and
various forms of cooptation

.
The use of force is a dicey issue for government. In the short run systematic,
sustained, moderate force works. But if it goes on too long or becomes extreme,
the use of force can generate a backlash against government and a boost for the
movement. Saul Alinsky was right: Your best action is often your opponent’s
reaction. Because a violent response to a peaceful protest generates great
sympathy from the media and the general public, peaceful provocation has
become a standard tactic of activists. But protest organizers always face the
problem of trying to control a small number of violent participants. If they fail, the
media will portrait this minority as representative of all protesters, making a violent
response seem justified.

 

In modern democracies, government control often amounts to cooptation or
absorption. This can take the form of providing funds to potentially problematic
groups, and hiring activist leaders or appointing them to boards. It can also take
the form of what is called “symbolic reassurance” whereby governments set up a
special hearings, commissions, or agencies to address a particular concerns or
grievances.

Government facilitation

Governments are not always on the other side. They will assist SMOs that are
pursuing objectives in synch with their own, sometimes creating programs,
conferences, and special funding to bolster the membership and credibility of
favorite SMOs. When fears of public or corporate backlash stall progressive policy
changes, they will support advocacy groups as a means of building public support.
In Canada, for instance, the Non-smokers Rights Coalition receives millions from
the Federal government to publicly lobby for federal laws requiring cigarette
packages carry large text warnings and gruesome photos showing the damage

caused by smoking. In effect, government pays to be openly lobbied in the media,
then responds when the public begins to see the need for government action.
SMOs often try to exploit circumstances where different levels of government
(federal, provincial/state, municipal), or different departments within the same
government, wind up on different sides of the same issue. In the American civil
rights movement, federal laws and lawsuits, clamped down on southern sheriffs
and voting registrars. In one important move, the US president Eisenhower called
out the National Guard to constrain Arkansas Governor Faubus in the Little Rock
school desegregation crisis.

 

Occasionally groups can use the courts to advance a social movement. Juries can
impede authority by nullifying formal law. Juries repeatedly delivering not guilty
verdicts for doctors accused of performing abortions, overthrowing the laws
prohibiting abortion. The courts can also undercut the use of force by the police.
Finally, court proceedings or semi-judicial hearings that capture media attention
can develop public support for movement goals. Still, a judicial route may cost a lot
of time and money even with a public interest advocate willing to take the case
pro-bono. As a rule of thumb, the courts are good at preventing injustice, and poor
at furthering progress.

Consciousness maintaining

The broad adoption of a mobilizing frame and recognition of the value of individual
contribution to collective action may be sufficient to generate collective action but
not enough to maintain it. The demise of radical feminism in the US after the civil
war, and after passage of the suffrage amendment shows how tenuous political
consciousness can be. To succeed a movement must generate support from
authorities, sympathy from bystanders and, most important, continue to be seen as
legitimate and effective by movement members. This inevitably means an ongoing
struggle with movement opponents to frame events and issues in a way that
supports the movement.

 

In their struggle for favorable public opinion, SMOs use various communications
technologies to get their message out. They use the telephone to recruit potential
members, reconnect to lapsed members, and generate action alerts though
established telephone trees. They most often use direct mail to reinforce
movement frames, acquire resources, and foment direct action. Because the
effectiveness of direct mail fundraising improves dramatically with television
exposure, some SMOs try to earn TV coverage, or obtain lower ad rates for public
service announcements with depoliticized content. Organizations with minimal
budgets prefer email listserves to direct mail. Maintaining consciousness on limited
budget requires inventive communications. The most effective SMOs have topnotch
communications professionals on staff.

 

On-going Frame alignment

Sociologists take pains to point out that frame alignment only works as an ongoing
process. According to David Snow and Robert Benford, SMOs must continue to
strive for alignment and action through diagnostic, prognostic, and motivational
framing. When confronted with a challenge, an SMO must diagnose the problem in

a way that resonates with members and potential members, propose a plausible
solution that could be accomplished by movement participation, and issue a call to
arms that motivates action. A successful SMO must also work hard to maintain the
saliency of supportive frames while attacking, debunking, and ridiculing counter
frames. Defensive measures usually extend to polarized us-versus-them framing
and may go further to framing opponents actions as corrupt, dishonest or evil. Loss
of alignment is a constant threat in the presence of counter movements and the
counter frames of opponents.

 

Frames from the news

Most people acquire their information and orientation to the world from the
impersonal mass media. With it they acquire stock frames and frame-making
ideologies. What they come to see as their own opinions for or against a social
movement are actually news constructed. Right wing ideology is both news
constructed and heavily promoted by the corporate owners of the mass media. It
assumes that we suffer from too much government, too many taxes and too many
controls of corporate enterprise [ Left wing ideology is both culturally constructed

by some intellectual cabal and heavily promoted by its activist allies and through such

means as Hollywood celebrities and elite media interests  -BR note ]

 

Any ideology, once adopted by the mass media, will almost certainly turn around

and infect the public that relies upon it for information. Only the most vigilant

can resist this kind of consistent framing, story after story, day after day.

Oppositional frames from intellectual workers

Those who teach at universities and colleges generate frames and frame-making
ideologies that counter established frames including those of the mass media.
Thus universities and colleges often serve as incubators for progressive
movements. But many movements go no further. They are frequently abandoned
by students who graduate and enter a variety of milieus where counter-movement
frames prevail.

 

Resource Maintenance

SMOs often face a dilemma when it comes to raising funds. If their membership is
impoverished and they depend their membership for funds, they will wind up
spending an inordinate amount of time and energy on fundraising for very little
return. If, on the other hand, they look to external elites, they will face funding
uncertainties and strings attached cooptation. External support usually tames a
movement steering it towards the more conservative goals of elite funders.
Nevertheless, most social movements eventually turn to elites — foundations,
corporations, and rich philanthropists — for assistance in order to sustain
themselves long enough to obtain substantial victories. Few funding organizations
consider this a problem. One that does is the British Crossroads Fund where a
board of both donors and activists makes decisions about grants.

Membership Maintenance

Besides attracting resources and new recruits, a movement must strive to maintain
the energies and loyalties of existing members. Like an effective small group, an
effective SMO will focus on frame alignment, trying its best to ensure a fit between

members values and movement goals. It will also work for concrete action and
visible victories, since people are drawn to a movement when they see it as a
forum for action, and soon drop out if nothing happens.

 

SMOs goals and tactics

SMOs face an uphill battle simply surviving— let alone achieving substantive,
political, social or economic change. They face a myriad of challenges with two
potentially powerful weapons: engaging goals and effective tactics. But many
organizations are weak on tactical thinking, and few pay sufficient attention to
social movement research. Some organizations fail because they engage in violent
or abusive action, which attracts media attention, but alienates supporters. This is
what happened to Black Power groups in the 1960’s. Others organizations, like the
Sea Shepard Society, succeed because they have found ways to legitimize
violence in pursuit of their goals. On the question of goals, research shows the
wisdom of maintaining a narrow focus, and a single goal. SMOs pursuing a single
goal are far more successful than those pursuing many goals. [ Valid only if

a single issue actually addresses the concerns of  leaders , who may have complex

agendas even when an agenda is framed as an easy-to-understand metaphor,

or the concerns of  populations, like Independent voters who want to see a variety of

problems solved since they realize that there is no single over-riding

issue to deal with, but a  systemic set of problems --BR note ]

 

InFact is a remarkable example of how to succeed with a narrow focus. InFact
started off with a single goal: End Nestle’s campaign to market its infant formula to
third world mothers in place of cheaper and healthier mother’s milk. Once they
succeeded they went after General Electric eventually forcing the huge
conglomerate to divest itself of its profitable nuclear weapons division.

 

Further social movement research

This brief overview should not be seen as a guide to creating a successful social
movement, but a baseline upon which to construct intelligent responses to the
ever-changing landscape of movement politics.

Further research may answer such key questions such as:
Can the ignition of a movement be carried out in organized fashion, or is it
dependent on Fortuna?

What are the best practices for small groups that have no resources?
Under what conditions can successful framing overcome a lack of structural
capacity?

Should activists spend more time developing frames that fuse personal and
collective identities?