Search results

Social movement scholars have profitably used framing theory to understand how movement demands resonate within different political and cultural climates. To be more useful, however, the theory's analytic vocabulary needs to be sharpened and clarified. To that end, this paper specifies the relationships between collective action frames, master frames, and ideology through a case study of the living wage movement. While concepts such as frame-bridging are critical in understanding how social movement demands resonate, these ideas need to be broadened to show how movements go beyond “fit” in negotiating the tension between their aspirations and the sobering realities of politics. I use the term economics of morality to convey the difficulty inherent in translating moral demands into policy solutions. A successful framing strategy must be pragmatic enough to compromise for short-term goals, but only in a manner that does not undermine the integrity of a movement's ideals and its long-term vision.

This chapter reflects upon the main reasons for the universal, deep, and long-lasting impact of the Mexican neozapatista movement during the 25 years of its public life, recuperating not only the immediate reasons but the reasons linked with process in the middle and in the long term. We argue that the neozapatista movement changed the correlation des forces in Mexico in 1994, opening the transition of all indigenous Latin American movements to pass from a defensive and marginal position, to a new offensive and protagonic position. In the general context after 1989 and the fall of the Berlin Wall, the Mexican neozapatism restores hope in social protest and social fight of all the anticapitalistic and antisystemic movements all over the world. With the above basis, it is possible to understand that this Mexican neozapatism was able to define the general agenda of the main demands and targets that were vindicated for the antisystemic movements during the last 25 years, including all the movements of 2011, such as the Spanish Indignados, or the so-called Arab Spring, or Occupy Wall Street, or even the current French movement of the Gilets Jeaunes, among many others. It explains partially the real function of a kind of “avant-garde” of the antisystemic movements all over the world, playing by the Mexican neozapatismo in the last five lusters and even today.

The aim of this paper is to consider the role of mass mobilisations against international business in Bolivia and analyse their wider implications for the structure of the state, relating this to recent studies looking at the scope of resistance to international business.

The analysis draws from a series of formal interviews with key political actors in Bolivia which were part of a wider ethnographic study exploring the emergence of the new hegemonic bloc in the country. The narrative is framed using the discourse theory of Laclau, and the methodology inspired by Bourdieu's understanding of social ethnography.

The paper finds that the uprisings against international business in Cochabamba in 2000 and El Alto in 2003 were pivotal in developing a wider critical consciousness to oppose neoliberalism in Bolivia. Subsequently, these social movements constructed a new identity as the “people” and implemented a more radical form of democracy.

The time period studied is such that it was impossible to assess whether or not this counter‐hegemonic movement has established a hegemonic bloc that has the potential to filter out into international resistance movements against business.

The paper offers a range of insights that may be useful to social movements concerned with constructing national and international struggles against capitalism and/or neoliberalism.

As far as is known, this is one of the first papers to outline how civil society resistance to international business can lead to wholesale shifts in the balance of power within a nation state and the construction of a substantively new political order.

Purpose of this paper is to explore how resistance of individual and collective actors play role in maintenance and change of institutions. Framing tactics of two emerging social movements in Istanbul Technical University and Middle East Technical University, which emerged against institutional changes in Turkish higher education, were examined by hybrid ethnography, using both online and offline data sources. Findings show that framing tactics of institutional entrepreneurs comprise different discourses and different forms of power, which also vary during different life stages of these movements. This paper contributes to existing literature in three ways. First power dynamics in institutional change, which is mostly disregarded in institutional theory, is taken into consideration. Second, with a longitudinal comparative study, it is shown that outcomes of social movements with similar demands may diverge according to different framing tactics based on power mechanisms that appealed at different stages of their life cycle. Third, this paper, as one of the few examples of a hybrid ethnographic approach, underlines the key role of considering both offline–online data sources, as an important part of actors’ life that take place in the online world.

A spate of nonviolent youth movements has recently demanded political change in the postcommunist region. Though these challenger organizations shared similar characteristics, some of them were more successful than others in mobilizing citizens against nondemocratic regimes. This chapter argues that analysis of tactical interactions between social movements and incumbent governments provides a partial explanation for cross-country variations in youth mobilization. The empirical analysis focuses on youth movements in Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Serbia, and Ukraine. The study traces how movement strategies and state countermoves affected the level of youth mobilization. This research contributes to social movement literature by analyzing tactical interactions in hybrid regimes, falling somewhere between democracy and dictatorship, and adds to civil resistance scholarship by comparing cases of successful and failed mobilization.

This research uses the social science perspectives of institutions, ecological modernization and social movements to analyze the rationale used by the early-adopting universities of fossil fuel divestment in the USA.

Through analysis of qualitative data from interviews with key actors at the universities that divested their endowments from fossil fuels, the paper examines how institutions navigate competing logics and frame their rationale.

The results show that while many institutions relied on ecological values embedded in their missions to justify their decision to divest, many also continued to embrace an altered version of market logic.

This research is primarily limited by its small population size. If the number of adoptees increases in the future, quantitative analysis should look for statistically robust trends.

The implications of this research are that we can expect more universities to commit to divesting from fossil fuels if their mission statements provide them with cultural material to rationalize the decision, but also expect them to couch the decision in continued goals and concerns for fiduciary responsibility and the subsequent growth of their endowment.

Social actors engaged in the fossil fuel divestment campaign may take this research and conclude that they need to build their arguments around the existing institutional logics and cultural identity.

This paper contributes original primary data documenting how institutional actors confront dominant logics using both a mixture of internal cultural identity and the reframing of the legitimated market logics.

This chapter starts with a short discussion of social work and how it interlinks educational issues with forms of support to enable people to cope with difficult situations. An example shall illustrate that a global perspective on questions of governance in social work has to consider the historical, economic, and political context in which it takes place. It will then be argued that “governance building” might be a fundamental necessity in strengthening the empowerment of people, and this means accepting the ambivalence of support and control. In this context, some distinguished authors will be identified who considered social movements as motors of governance bringing in normative aspects, which cannot be reduced to functional theory. Finally, the chapter concludes by reflecting on the role of research in defining support programs in welfare states.

Past predictions of convergence between American capitalism and the Soviet planned economy optimistically assumed that advanced industrial society must also become democratic and pragmatic in its choice of economic policies. The Soviets had to become more capitalist. All such predictions proved only partially correct. Russia did become capitalist after a hugely destructive collapse, which obliterated the democratic demands of the 1960s in deindustrialization and enormous inequalities. Only ideological prejudices, reinforced in 1989, prevent most observers from seeing that America and Russia did in fact converge in a similar pattern of socioeconomic crisis. The outcomes of their crisis sequences could seem different in 2012, but these might not be the final outcomes.