Contentious Politics in Theory

Political participation and social

movements
Contentious Politics
 Contentious politics is the use of
disruptive techniques to make a political
point, or to change government policy.
Examples of such techniques are actions
that disturb the normal activities of
society such as demonstrations, general
strike action, riot, terrorism, civil
disobedience, and even revolution or
insurrection. Social movements often
engage in contentious politics
Tilly, Charles. Contentious Performances.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2008: 5.

 "interactions in which actors make

claims bearing on someone else's
interest, in which governments
appear either as targets, initiators of
claims, or third parties
Contentious collective action

 Conflict is the core component of social movements. To

put it otherwise: there is no movement without conflict

 Contentious politics (i.e. the politics of social

movements) also involve cultural conflicts (conflicts over
the meaning of events). Since in pluralist, democratic
societies the meaning of events is subjected to different
interpretations, social movements try to convince the
public opinion of their interpretations

 Social movements give new meanings to old facts. Thus,

conflicts considered typical of private sphere involving
problems of self-definition (identity) can be transformed
into public issues (i.e. domestic violence against women)
Political autonomy
 Until the early 1970s, social scientist believed that
social movements were the result of some kind of
anomie (i.e. chaos or the absence of norms)

 Social sciences proved, however, that beyond the

irrational appearance of the protest there was in fact
a rational way of acting.

 Since social movements are organized outside the

State, the State do not recognizes the movements
their ability to create and organize institutions.

 But social movements are not anomic, but

autonomous in relation to the State.
What’s a social movement?

 When we speak about social movements it is

necessary to differentiate them from related concepts
such as political parties, interest groups, protest
events, etc.

 A social movement is a network of informal

interactions between a plurality of individuals, groups
and/or organizations sharing a common identity and
engaged in a series of sustained collective actions
challenging political authorities in a contentious way
Prominent scholars
 Dough McAdam
 Alberto Melucci
 Charles Tilly
 Sidney Tarrow
 Alain Touraine
What’s a social movement?, 2
 Our definition emphasise at least four
aspects of social movement
dynamics:

 Networks of informal interaction

 Shared beliefs and solidarity
 Contentious collective action
 Political autonomy
Networks of informal interaction
 Social movements are sustained by activist networks
of informal interaction

 The characteristic of these networks may range from

the very loose and dispersed links to the tightly
clustered networks which facilitate adhesion to armed
groups

 Activist networks promote the circulation of essential

ressources for collective action as well as broader
systems of meaning.

 Activist networks create then necessary preconditions

for political mobilisation
Shared beliefs, identity, and
solidarity, 1

 To be a social movement requires a shared set of

beliefs and a sense of belongingness

 In so far as a social movement implies a sustained

series of contentious collective action, its continuity
relies upon group identity and ideologies

 Unlike political parties, social movements do not have

clear boundaries. Collective identity plays then an
essential role in defining the boundaries of a social
movement.
Shared beliefs, identity, and
solidarity, 2

 Group identity is both a matter of self- and external

definition. Actors must define themselves as part of a
broader movement and, at the same time, be
perceived as such, by those within the same
movement, and by opponents and/or external
observers

 The presence of shared beliefs and solidaritues allows

both actors and observers to assign a common
meaning to specific contentious events which
otherwise could not be identified as part of a common
process
v
types of social movement
 Scope:
 reform movement - movements advocating changing some norms or laws.
 radical movement - movements dedicated to changing value systems in a
fundamental way.
 Type of change:
 innovation movement - movements which want to introduce or change particular
norms, values, etc..
 conservative movement - movements which want to preserve existing norms,
values, etc.
 Targets:
 group-focus movements - focused on affecting groups or society in general,
 individual-focused movements - focused on affecting individuals. Most religious
movements would fall under this category.
 Methods of work:
 peaceful movements
 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.
 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, 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.
 local movements - most of the social movements have a local scope.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.
Contentious politics in
Indonesia

II. Social movements in

Indonesia
A tipology of Indonesia social
movements
 Labor: strikes, conflicts in business and economic sectors…
 National (or regional): anticentralist claims, separatist …
 Civil liberties: Corcuera law, Human rigth, antirrepresión,
prisonn, anticorruptions
 Feminist (queer) gender (or anti-gender), gay and lesbian,
women’s movement…
 Ecology: protests for environment, against infrastructure...
 Urban poor: urban poor alike, undocumented people...
 Student: include demonstrations of the educational world, but no
labor disputes teachers (labor movement)
 Leftism : anti/pro capitalism, free markets
 Religious Comunities
 Free-man culture: criminal groups
 Ethnic group: mobilizations against war, conscientious
objection…
 Trans-movement (international solidarity): Campaigning anti-
America o-Cuba, pro-Palestine, islamic brotherhood
 ANALISA
GERAKAN SOSIAL

 Dalam konteks gerakan demokrasi di Indonesia, Arif Budiman & Olle

Tornquist (2001) menyatakan bhw aspek kunci dari politik demokratisasi di
Indonesia terdiri dari :
• Kondisi atau struktur kesempatan politikakses terhadap politik & konflik
• Jenis isu & kepentingan yg dipolitisasi oleh para aktorberkaitan dg
kepentinhan masyarakat atau individu; perspektifnya idiologis atau tidak.
Hal ini dikaitkan dg konsep framing: dlm btk kritik & tuntutan thdp ngr
ataukah dlm btk kerja swadaya
• Struktur mobilisasi  strategi atau cara-cara para aktor dlm memobilisai &
mengorganisasikan masyarakat. Mnrt Tornquist ada 5 metode
pengorganisasian diri:
1. Populisme: membutuhkan pemimpin yg kharismatik
2. Klientelisme: diasosikan dg para bos yg memberikan perlindungan sbg imbalan
bagi layanan & dukunhan
3. Corak tertentu dari klientelisme
4. Jaringan sejumlah organisasi independen: ini merupakan cara utama
mengintegrasikan masyarakat ke dalam politik dari bawah
5. Integrasi yg terorganisasi: melalui struktur partai & lsm
ANALISA ARIF BUDIMAN TERHADAP 7
GERAKAN PRODEMOKRASI PD ERA ORBA
1. Gerakan petani Kedung Ombo
2. Konflik Nipah di Madura
3. Pemogokan buruh di Medan
4. Demonstrasi menentang pembreidelan
pers(majalah Tempo)
5. ‘pembrontakan’ suku Amungme di Papua
6. Kasus PDI-P pimpinan Megawati atau
peristiwa 27 Juli 1996 (Kudatuli)
7. Gerakan Mega Bintang atau anti
kuningisasi di Solo
 Meskipun semua gerakan melakukan perlawanan terhadap pemerintah yg otoriter,
hanya aktor-aktor yg mengembangkan wacana perjuangannya menjadi wacana
demokratisasi, perjuangan tsb bisa efektif & bertahan dlm kurun waktu yg panjang
1. Gerakan yg melembagakan perjuanganya scr profesional & modern memiliki daya
tahan yg panjang
2. Jaringan yg berlingkup luas dari skala lokal, nasional sampai internasional memainkan
peran penting dlm memperkuat gerakan perlawanan
3. Terdapat saling keterkaitan antara gerakan pro demokrasi satu dgn yg lainnya
sebuah gerakan tidak akan mencapai hasil kalau tidak didahului oleh gerakan
sebelumnya
4. Tipe organisasi & kepemimpinan (tradisional atau modern) belum menunjukan
pengaruh nyata pd gerakan pro demokrasi yg lbh penting adalah menyusun
kekuatan utk melawan aneka btk represi
Struktur mobilisasi atau pengorganisasian gerakan,menurut McAdam, memainkan peranan
menonjol terhadap daya tahan & efektivitas gerakan. Contohnya adalah gerakan
perlawanan rakyat Toba Samosir thdp Indorayon yg bertahan sampai dua dasawarsa
(1983-2000)
Menurut Charles Tilly, the main determinants dari mobilisasi kelompok adalah:
1. Organisasi
2. Interest
3. Peluang atau ancaman
4. Kemampuan kelompok dalam menyikapi represi atau fasilitas
Thank you