Department of Political Science and Sociology

(PSS)
Course Title: Introduction to Political Science
Course Code: POL 101

Lecture: Social Movement

Nurul Huda Sakib

PhD (The University of Sydney)
Associate Professor
Department of Government and Politics
Jahangirnagar University
Savar, Dhaka-1342, Bangladesh.
 Questions For Discussion
• How many of you actively
participate any types of social
movement? Why?
• How many of you have
seen/observed (reading in
newspaper, TV, Social Media)
any types of social movement?
• Can you tell me some of your
observation from those
particular movement?
 Social Movement
• A social movement is neither a riot nor electoral politics.
• Rather, it is a sustained collective articulation of
resistance to elite opponents by a plurality of actors with
a common purpose (Tarrow 1998).
• According to Charles Tilly (2004), the three main
elements of social movements are:
-Campaigns (long-term, organized public efforts that
make collective claims on target authorities),
-Repertoires (tactics that a group has at its disposal
in a certain sociopolitical environment), and
_WUNC (worthiness, unity, numbers, and
commitment). WUNC matters because it conveys crucial
political messages to a social movement’s targets and the
relevant public.
• Key to any social movement are mobilizing strategies
—”those collective vehicles, informal as well as formal,
through which people mobilize and engage in collective
action” (McAdam, McCarthy, and Zald 1996, 3).
Social Movements
• Long-term conscious effort to promote or
prevent social change
• May develop around any issue of public
concern
• Factors that distinguish social movements
from other forms of collective behavior
are that social movements:
-Are long-lasting
-Possess a highly structured
organization with formally recognized
leaders
-Make a deliberate attempt to
institute or block societal change
 Types of Social Movements
1. Reactionary: Main goal is to reverse current
social trends (turn back the clock).Members
are suspicious of and hostile toward social
change.
2. Conservative: Attempt to protect what they
see as society’s prevailing values from change
that they consider to be a threat to those
values. Ex: Religious Right seeks to uphold
traditional family and social values.
3. Revisionary: Goal is to improve, or revise,
some part of society through social change.
Usually use legal channels to seek change. Ex:
Women’s suffrage.
4. Revolutionary: Goal is a total and radical
change of the existing social structure.
Ultimate aim is to overthrow existing
government and replace it. Ex: American
Revolution, Arab Spring.
 Stages in the Life Cycle of Social
Movements
• Blumer (1969), Mauss (1975), and Tilly (1978) have described
different stages social movements often pass through.
Movements emerge for a variety of reasons (see the theories
below), coalesce (come together), and generally bureaucratize.
At that point, they can take a number of paths, including: finding
some form of movement success, failure, co-optation of leaders,
repression by larger groups (e.g., government), or even the
establishment of the movement within the mainstream.
• Agitation (Emerge): Small group of people attempts to stir up
public awareness of the issue, often with the intention of
gaining widespread support for the social movement
• Legitimation: Social movement becomes more respectable as it
gains increasing acceptance among the population.
• Leaders are now seen as legitimate spokespeople of a just cause
(and not radicals)
• Movement will often begin to attract media attention
• Bureaucratization: Movement has developed a ranked structure
of authority, official policies, and efficient strategies for the
future.
• Institutionalization: Movement has become an established part
of society
 Questions For Discussion

• Thinking about Shahbag Movement, Do you find any similarities

with stages describe in the previous slides?
• In your opinion why Shahbag movement was successful?
• Thinking about types of social movement, under which category
you would like define Shahbag movement? Why?
 Theories of Social Movement: Relative
Deprivation/Social Strain
• Through different theories, social movement scholars attempt to
explain the emergence and timing of social movements.
• Early theories of collective behavior explained social movements
through a micro-level lens rooted in social psychology.
• Relative Deprivation/Social Strain holds that individuals participate
in collective behavior because they feel deprived of goods or
resources, and therefore they experience social strain.
• These theories consider acts of collective action rooted in a sense of
alienation.
• Social movements arise when largae numbers of people feel
economically or socially deprived of what they think they deserve.
• Through movements, people seek to gain access to things they lack
but others have.
• Often used to explain revolutionary social movements.
• But the theory ignores the larger context in which movements arise
(McAdam 1982). By identifying discontent as the most significant
cause of social movements, early theories could not adequately
explain how individual discontent translates into collective
phenomena.
 Theories: Resource-Mobilization Theory
• The resource mobilization theory argued that social movements
are formed by rational social actors and SMOs undertake strategic
political action (McCarthy and Zald 1973; Tilly 1978).
• Their resources include knowledge, money, media attention, labor,
solidarity, organizational structure, legitimacy, and support from
political elites.
• Theorists characterized protesters as purposeful and motivated on
the basis of a calculation of the costs and benefits regarding
participation, and SMOs as having organizational structures in
place, both of which were considered prerequisites for action
(Gamson 1975).
• Even states that even the most ill-treated group with the most just
cause will not be able to bring about change without resources.
• Resources necessary to generate a social movement include a
body of supporters, financial resources, and access to the media.
• Body of supporters must include talented people who have the
time and skills necessary to work toward change.
• Social movements must also be able to mobilize financial
resources.
• Media coverage is the surest way to bring the movement to the
attention of the most people possible.
 Social Movement Outcomes
• Research on social movement outcomes tries to address the crucial question of why social movements
succeed or fail.
• In most cases it is difficult to categorically establish a direct causal relationship between attempts at
collective behavior and successful results, but theorists point to a number of significant factors:
-including taking strategic advantage of existing political opportunities (Meyer and Minkoff 2004),
-employing particular tactics (Tilly 2006; McAdam 1982),
-expressing a clearly defined set of goals that movement supporters can relate to (Jasper 1997; Zald
1996),
-accessing resources and forming alliances that expand the movement’s base of support (Gamson
1990; McCarthy and Zald 1977), and
-adopting specific organizational forms and practices (Ganz 2004; Piven and Cloward 1977).
• Some scholars characterize successful outcomes as either challengers meeting their goals or the target
of collective action recognizing the challengers as legitimate representatives of a constituency.
• Increases the political leverage exercised by challengers.
• Cultural variables such as changes in values and public opinion, the establishment of a collective identity
or subcultures, and new cultural opportunities are significant elements of social movement outcomes
(Polletta 2008; Earl 2004).
 Social Movements in the Digital Age
• There are different views regarding the influence of new media on social movements—what we will call
theories of new media in this book—but what is clear is that the technology available at a particular time and
within a given cultural setting affects mobilization efforts.
• Today, activists rely on digital and web-based tools in addition to material resources.
• Some scholars view the digital revolution as having a positive effect on mobilizing endeavors.
• Castells (2001) argues that new ICTs invigorate an explosive type of informational politics, resulting in a new
kind of civil society based on the electronic grassrooting of democracy.
• The diffusion of new technology prompts the development of horizontal networks of interactive
communication through a many-to-many flow of communication.
• Theorists have long noted that social networks, relational ties, and friendships serve as an important channel
for recruiting people to a cause, especially for high-risk protest movement actions (Snow et al. 1986; McAdam
1982).
• New ICTs greatly expand the potential of these networks to develop and mutate exponentially.
• For example, Doug McAdam and Ronnelle Paulsen (1993) argue that, although the strength of social ties
strongly influences recruitment on the individual level, weak social ties forged in the virtual sphere can
effectively spread a social movement’s message across diffuse networks.
• The virtual world now provides additional context to better determine the nature of individuals’ interpersonal
social ties (this could be friends, neighbors, coworkers, fellow students, church members, or other
 Social Movements in the Digital Age
• Many activists, particularly youth, receive information about mobilizations and contentious (as well as
electoral) politics through digital channels from someone they trust that they may not receive
otherwise, which Marco Giugni (1998) finds increases the likelihood of their participation.
• Others note that new ICTs broaden the parameters of organization efforts because the obstacles to
grassroots mobilization are lowered and are facilitated by what Bruce Bimber (2003) calls “accelerated
pluralism.”
• New technology allows organizers to reach a critical mass quickly and cheaply.
• In contrast to the one-to-many flow of information through mass communication media, with new
ICTs and social media citizens can comment on and pass along information they receive (H. Jenkins
2006; Van Aelst and Walgrave 2003).
• They can therefore develop a sense of community in spite of physical distance in the form of “virtual
public spheres” (Kahn and Kellner 2003).
• Additionally, these new types of information sharing are potentially resistant to state regulation,
reducing a state’s capacity to repress the distribution of political communication, thereby giving rise to
a new type of civic engagement at the grassroots level (Bennett and Iyengar 2008).
• In sum, the soft power of new information technologies challenges the hard physical power of the
state (Nie 2001).