Literature Review On Social Movements

indicate that both versions should be analyzed to fully understand the phenomenon, and will be done so through an examination of collective identity and informal mobilization networks.

A social movement is defined as the gathering of people to change an element of society that they feel is not acceptable and cannot endure any longer. There are two primary types of movements: reactive and proactive. Reactive movements typically involved resistance movements and are a pushback or reaction to current social changes. Proactive social movements include reform and revolutionary social movements which are designed to bring radical social change and replace the existing structures with new ones. While these definitions remain constant, as social changes impact societies, many social movements may change labels. A proactive movement can become a reactive movement and vice-versa.

Social movements are one of the primary means through which the public is able to collectively express their concerns about the rights and wellbeing of themselves and others. Under the proper conditions, social movements not only shed light on issues and open large scale public discourse, but they can also serve as a means of eliciting expedited societal change and progress. Due to their potential impact, studying the characteristics of both failed and successful social movements is important in order to ensure that issues between the public and the government are resolved to limit injustices and maintain societal progress.

Therefore, it is understandable that movement scholars tend to write from a rather activist stance. There is nothing wrong with this per se, however, as historians, we should critically assess in how far this positioning might limit our scholarship. At times, Payne tends to overemphasize the unity and the solidarity among the organizers and the local population and fails to mention the tensions among direct democratic groups like SNCC. Every social movement is made up of people, united under what they perceive as an urgent need to bring about change. This unity tends to suppress theoretical and practical differences for some time and can thus create a tremendous amount of communality and solidarity among its members. However, as history has shown over and over again, as soon as the external threat either diminishes or proves resistant to change, movements tend to disunite. This is what Baker and other activists wanted to prevent by modeling their training around local long-term strategies and individual

Social movements of the 1960’s and 1970’s have been interpreted and written about in varying ways. While contemporary scholarship disagrees with past analyses and offer fresh perspectives, past research can also provide a pathway for defining important questions for future research on social movements in America.

Social movements have many different definitions. In his paper, Social Movements, James Jasper defines them as “sustained and intentional efforts to foster or retard social changes, primarily outside the normal institutional channels encouraged by authorities”. (CITE) In simpler terms, a social movement is a movement created by people who want a social or political change. A big part of social movements is resource mobilization theory. Resource mobilization theory states that social movements “succeed through the effective mobilization of resources and the development of political opportunities for members” (CITE). This means that if a social movement wants to be successful, they need to organize themselves so they can do things such as collect funds from constituents and elites, receive volunteers and members, and get their

Social movements are large groups of people who are usually without political power and influence that decide to promote or resist social change through unconventional means (Monnier, 2010). Social movements begin when there is a problem identified by a certain group of people. The group finds out who is responsible for failing to appropriately address their issues and at that point proceed to take action themselves. These movements can be violent or nonviolent when addressing the responsible parties. There are many types of social movements that include but not limited to civil rights, animal rights and environmental rights movements. The basis of these movements would derive from the conflict theory. The conflict theory

These three movements are a big part of our history and each of the three show that when many people with a common goal work together, especially when a leader takes charge, that sometimes non-violent acts such as speeches and protests are more powerful than fighting and they successfully create big changes.

Tarrow, Sidney G. Power in Movement: Social Movements and Contentious Politics. Cambridge University Press; 2 edition (May 13, 1998).

Protests have long been an essential part of American life, employed to to draw attention to critical issues,events, and injustices. Ranging from peaceful marches to powerful acts of civil disobedience, not only in the United States but in Central American countries such as Nicaragua. This being said, civil protests and peaceful demonstrations were not necessarily more successful in exuding change than pieces of legislation but moreso acted as a catalyst for social change, leading towards legislation that would positively impact those who protested. The concept of civil disobedience and peaceful demonstration acting as a catalyst can be examined mainly through the protests during the Civil Rights Movement in the U.S. and the Sandinista

The idea of civil disobedience is one that has fascinated human beings and American culture specifically for generations. The idea of brave men and women going beyond the bounds of the law to fight whatever injustice stands in their path is one that has been frequently romanticized. However, today many are beginning to become disillusioned with the idea of civil disobedience, questioning whether or not today’s social activists are capable of any real change, as many issues such as widespread poverty or race relations seem to go unredressed. The distinction between the political protests in history that are idealized and those seen today which seem relatively ineffective is simply the ability to communicate. Movements that effectively communicate

Social movements shed light to social issues present in communities and harvest social change in political, religious, educational, health, government, and other institutional matters. Social movements give individuals a clear outlet to concerns about the rights and well-being of themselves and others, mostly through public protest and conversation, in order to promote social justice and democracy. Throughout history, humans naturally ended up starting movements to simply improve their way of life and movements have continually aided in a remarkable change in communities. In the essay “From Civil Rights to Megachurches,” Charles Duhigg explains the three critical steps that initiative successful social movements. Social movements must

“As they fathom injustice, organize to protest, craft a tactics, and engage in action, these bodies read what is happening and articulate their imaginative rebuttal. In so doing they demonstrate to themselves and all those watching that something can be done. Could this be why they are called political ‘movements’?”

Social movements have a tremendous impact on our society and it is important that we understand how those movements are shaped. As individuals we are all part of a greater society and could be called upon to stand up for human rights. Understanding how to shape social movements so they have better chances of succeeding could mean the difference between a society that guides improved human rights and one that loses sight. There is a great deal of literature on social movements and it has become increasing popular since the Vietnam Era of social protest. The literature typically

Above definition revealed that social action is used as tool for mobilizing people. And it has the scope of change within society with respect to a planned strategy. However such a mobilization can never be taken to its logical conclusion as the contradiction can never be brought and a stage of a