Upload
mrvf
View
215
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
7/29/2019 Why Social Movements Now
1/10
Why Social Movements Now?1
- David Sogge
To begin answering the question, Why social movements now?, let's pose a counter-question
about social movements: Where would we now be without them?
Where would South Africa be today without the United Democratic Front or the Mass
Democratic Movement? Where would many societies be without the movement for women's
rights? Or, to go way back to the dawn of Western democratic systems, where would we be
without the movement for citizen's rights and equality during the English Revolution some 350
years ago? The point is inescapable. Without these and other emancipatory movements, many
lands would be a lot less free, less fair, less democratic.
But if social movements have been such positive movers and shakers for humanity, why aren't
they stronger and more numerous now? Some reasons are obvious. Apathy and the sheer
practical difficulties of stepping off the treadmill of daily life help explain the absence of
social movements. And backers of the status quo, often powerful people, oppose them.
1 Originally published in OD Debate (Durban) August 1997
7/29/2019 Why Social Movements Now
2/10
7/29/2019 Why Social Movements Now
3/10
NGOs2. Examples in South Africa include networks of organisations concerned to fight child
labour, to combat violence against women, to promote stokvels and to press for
environmental sanity.
How do they come about and keep going?
Consider two among dozens of examples in modern African history.
>> The maji-maji (water-water) movement in colonial Tanganyika was a response by people
threatened by the colonial advance, made desperate by loss of assets and sovereignty. Many
perished in the belief that their magic - supposed to turn bullets into water -was stronger than
imperial ballistics. In short, a movement unable to fit the circumstances and gain leverage.
>> TheAfrican mineworkers movement in the 1940s and 1950s in the copperbelt of Northern
Rhodesia was broadly about basic rights and respect, and narrowly about better pay. Itchallenged the status quo but still played by certain rules (a parallel union, the strike Weapon
and industry-wide bargaining). It turned the tables on mine bosses and settler authorities by
appealing to their hallowed (if hollow) principles of fair play and Western precedents in
legitimizing the right of wage earners to organise. While not immediately successful, this
movement had, over ten years, paved the way for a nationalist political movement to assume
power in a new nation, Zambia.
Two stories, two outcomes. Both saw Africans challenging powerful outsiders who would denythem resources and respect. Yet there were great differences:
the historical moment (the beginning versus the end of the colonial epoch);
aims (total and uncompromising rejection versus a challenge to some ground rules);
choice of weapons (bullets versus non-violent pressure); and
2 NGOs may or may not be part of social movements. Increasingly leaders of member-based
organisations and social movements are asserting that many NGOs arenot. For example, Roberto
Campos, elected president of a broad association of peasant farmers in Central America, has stated,
We dont need all those NGOs." Elsewhere, activists have decried the exit of NGOs from socio-political
movements and their mutation into professional enterprises, as observed among Palestinian NGOs by
Hammami, 1995. For an important critique of the tendency to lump NGOs together with member-based
groups and movements, see Uphoff 1995.
7/29/2019 Why Social Movements Now
4/10
modes of livelihood as a basis of consciousness (semi- pastoralists versus wage
earners).
These social movements had few contemporary well-wishers or allies -- or rivals. They pursued
their struggles largely alone. Today the field is more crowded, competitive. and complex.However, some conceptual tools are on offer to help cut through the underbrush.
Theory
Students of social movements have long struggled over concepts to explain them. In re-
interpreting movements in the past, they have had to cast off or transform old received ideas.
With his now classic book, The Making of the English Working Class, the English historian E.P.
Thompson helped dethrone doctrinaire theories that only a factory-based proletariat can lead
a progressive social movement. He showed that the early working class movement had a broad
social base, embracing artisans and small traders as well as wage earners. AII faced severe
social stress. They sought dignity and respect for their rights. They drew up no strategic plans
and submitted no budgets to funders, but created their own means of mutual aid and their
own cultural vehicles, such as the many revival sects of early Methodism. The relevance of
such interpretations for the study of social movements in Africa has not gone unnoticed3.
Today, numbers and types of social movements have grown, and intellectual tastes are
diversifying. Thus academic kitchens have produced more elaborate menus of theories and
foci of fact-gathering.
In respect to what drives and keeps movements going, two approaches stand out.
One concentrates on the mobilisation and use of resources. It explains movement processes
through their (political) economy. Their direction and pace depends on recruitment of
movement foot soldiers, and on raising profile and funds. Ideology and social psychology don't
count that much, as what really set things in motion are imperatives from deep within social
structures -- poverty, denial of respect and rights -- or the opportunism of political Ieaders.For some critics, however, this approach offers little more than a firm grasp of the obvious:
all movements need money and members.
3See von Freyhold 1987.
7/29/2019 Why Social Movements Now
5/10
In the 1980s a new theoretical school eclipsed the resource mobilisation approach. It
embraced social psychology and the power of symbolic interaction. its perspectives emerged
as counter-cultural youth, environmental and disarmament movements demonstrated staying
power. This action mobilisation school puts human agency -- the participants and leaders --
at center stage. Ideology, values and a struggle to define cultural meanings and even
identities become central, even motive forces. Collective action makes its points through
symbols (unusual clothing, ritual, processions) and public gestures (entering a nuclear testing
zone, issuing a timely press release). It also builds a sense of autonomy, identity and
solidarity among participants.
In contrast to the 'resource mobilisation' perspective, by which movements are viewed as
socio-political phenomena, this approach portrays social movements as socio-cultural actors.
Sometimes borrowing from the arcane modern disciplines of sign- and discourse-analysis, this
way of looking at social movements sees them engaged not so much in the sweaty, deal-
making business of really existing political institutions, as in posing extended, radical
challenges to prevailing norms and institutions. Movements thus carry prophetic functions',
drawing the attention of media and politicians to the existence of social problems4.
Today there are calls for a synthesis of the two approaches5. Capturing and structuring
attention of publics and decision-makers through symbolic action is vital to movement
success. Nevertheless, money and material resources, and how they are steered and struggled
over, still explain a lot about movements' careers and effectiveness. Resources continue to
loom large in much empirical research, particularly into social movement organisations, the
formal vehicles of social movements. Research has focused on classic' movements for
economic and civil rights in industrialized countries.
One such study (Minkoff, 1994) uses US data from 1955 to 1985 on organisations in the
women's and black/Chicano voluntary and activist sector, and their funding and political
environments. At issue is the rise and fall of organisations according to their chosen strategies
or "repertoires of collective action". The three most common strategies are held to be:
service provision to a constituency, without pressing for change in policy;
4The writings of the sociologist A. Melucci exemplify this approach.
5 Canel, 1997, offers an excellent statement.
7/29/2019 Why Social Movements Now
6/10
protest -- challenging elites through non-routine means; and,
advocacy -- challenging elites through routine means.
Authorities, funders and members tend to prefer and thus legitimize certain strategies.
Enforcement of these preferences can sometimes benefit other organisations pursuing otheroptions, for example by legitimizing more vigorous action. But often they don't. For example,
new organisations pursuing the 'preferred' strategy will compete resources away from those
organisations committed to less-favoured strategies. Thus some organisations flourish while
others wither away.
Around 1970, following what were sometimes hard-edged public actions by (and often hard-
handed repression of) many protest groups, the voluntary/activist sector saw dramatic shifts
of actors and their strategies. Protest-centred groups got sidelined, and advocacyorganisations multiplied and came to the fore, where they remain today. Both the protest
and the advocacy organisations could build on the legitimacy of causes espoused by the
preceding generation of minority and women's rights movements, which had confined action
to service provision and had avoided confrontation. But given the preferences of funding and
other authorities, the advocacy organisations gained legitimacy through the presence of a
radical flank of protest groups, since elites needed alternatives to defuse challenges and re-
channel discontent.
Political space and opportunities created by new laws and welfare measures also influenced
cascading patterns of change in these social movements. But the flow of foundation grants
was even more decisive in steering things toward intermediate methods (advocacy) and
setting limits to confrontational ones (protest).
What might stop them?
Where social movements pressing for majorchanges in the rules of the game or seeking
wholesale displacement of ruling blocs, they can sometimes win only in times of acute social
crisis, and vulnerability or self-doubt among power-holders. Most of the time, however, such
movements get clobbered. In Latin America, southern Africa and places like Indonesia the
clobbering has been done by special police units, or, more commonly in today's privatized
world, by shadowy hit squads and rent-a-mobs.
7/29/2019 Why Social Movements Now
7/10
Today, emancipatory movements perish not only by direct repression. They also die by a
thousand cuts. They get demonized and belittled in the media, denied legitimacy through
phony elections, co-opted by politicians and, quite commonly, fatally injured through self-
inflicted wounds of factionalism and of compromised leaderships. Splits and schisms continue
to cripple or kill social movements. Factionalism within or between organisations often pivots
on who controls resources.
Here too the role of funding authorities can be significant. Beyond steering organisations
toward certain strategies, noted above, donors show preferences in organisationalforms.
Umbrella or apex bodies are a favorite, as monies can be granted an accounted for with
minimum fuss -- to the donor. But in the movements themselves, this can reinforce
unresponsive hierarchies and patron-client systems. If these remain unchecked by members,
tensions rise. The resulting schisms will, in the worst cases, shatter the very movement the
donors thought they were helping.
Social movements may also lose momentum and stop when victory seems to have been won.
Then leaders are recruited away to government or business -- or are consigned to oblivion.
Demobilisation and organisational decay sets in, both through natural release of tension, and
deliberate discouragement from on high. In its transition period, South Africa has heard words
of discouragement about social movements from both foreign and domestic oracles. They
warn against any revival of protest or of initiatives to make claims on profits or public
resources, as these only raise unrealistic' expectations. More dangerously, such movements
could lure decision-makers to pursue 'populist' economic measures. The prevailing wisdom
holds that a culture of entitlement must be smothered in its crib and that there is no
alternative to austerity measures for the poor.
Why social movements now?
Someone once said that the definition of the alternatives is the supreme instrument of power.
In southern Africa, and elsewhere in the world, a broad array of people and organisations is
challenging the claim to power represented by the There-Is-No-Alternative bloc comprising
Business South Africa, the IMF and key economic advisors to the government. The challengers,
comprising trade unions, some church bodies and environmental activists, are opposing
business-as-usual indifference to poverty and to gender equity and the denial of rights and
7/29/2019 Why Social Movements Now
8/10
self-esteem for young people and ethnic 'others'. Their message is both an alarm signal about
prevailing conditions, and an insistence that they be addressed through open processes. They
first wish to say, These are problems"; and second to say, "Don't remove them from the
public agenda by defining them as non-negotiable; there are alternatives."
Someone else once defined politics, cynically, as the art of preventing people from taking part
in affairs which properly concern them. If exclusion is the name of the game in today's politics
-- and, despite enormous democratic advances in places like South Africa and Mozambique,
there is much evidence to support the cynic's view -- then means are badly needed for citizens
to shape public agendas and to gain the space to participate on terms meaningful to them.
Down through the centuries, those insisting on taking part in affairs which properly concern
them have found those means, and created that space, through emancipatory social
movements.
Points for reflection
Given their importance, social movements merit more attention than they have received up to
now from non- profits, applied researchers, funders, and organisational development
specialists. (They also merit more nuanced treatment of their complexities and paradoxes
than can be given here.)
However, this may now be changing. In South Africa, prior neglect of member- andcommunity-based groups, the building blocks of social movements, is now held up for (self-)
criticism among some NGO leaders. A few northern private aid agencies, most of whom claim
wholehearted backing for civil society are inserting social movements into their policy
discourse, and sometimes even into their grant portfolios.
But those wishing to see emancipatory social movements gain more clout and staying-power,
still have a lot to reflect on. Among major points of learning, the following stand out:
Conflict. Non-violent, constructive pressure is what drives social movements forward, making
them effective. Obviously, there are risks to movement members, given the hair's breadth
often separating violent from non-violent public action, and the hair-trigger responses of he
officials tasked with maintaining public order. No wonder then that conflict avoidance, the
exit option, is a strategy of choice, especially for vulnerable people. yet it can a1so be a path
to irrelevance or even oblivion. There is a need to distinguish the destructive from the
7/29/2019 Why Social Movements Now
9/10
creative use of conflict. The art and science of conflict management is thus one key area for
learning.
Communication. If the vocation of social movements is to signal problems to the wider public
and to decision-makers, to act as prophetic presences, then, in a world where attention is
becoming the most sought after resource, learning how to attract and structure attention is an
imperative task.
Resources. Dealing openly and honestly about funds and other resources needs special
attention. This is especially so where there are risks -- often real risks, as underscored by the
research cited above -- that authorities will seek to steer movements away from being
.unreasonable', or, as a1so noted, where vibrant organisations risk being turned into
opportunistic enterprises or clubby patronage machines, or of being 'snuggled' or 'financed' to
death by over-enthusiastic (or manipulative) funders. These issues merit reelection, especially
among would-be supporters of social movements. Perhaps a first principle for donors should
be Do No Harm.
Ownership. NGOs are not the only ones to have neglected the grassroots. Even leaderships of
social movements have sometimes shown themselves unable to resist claims on their attention
by political and business elites. South Africa is not alone in having seen the harm done by
catapulting social movement leaders, however worthy and well-meaning, into roles where
they are expected to represent 'the grassroots'. In South Africa these command performances
take place in regional or national forums built along corporatist lines, that is, where deals are
routinely made among various social blocs with little public transparency. The lack of
anchoring and accountability can quickly turn solid, gutsy social movements into mere hollow
shells. Yet, is a return to the time-consuming, even paralyzing practice of mandating'
grassroots leaders the answer? Here too there is much to reflect on.
As non-profits and funders re-value social movements and therefore revisit these and other
issues, students and practitioners of organisational development will have to grapple with
them too.
Facing social movements from a distance, however, many of us know them only as outsiders
looking in. What if the distances were shorter, and the approach began from within? Where
can specialists in organisational development best position themselves, and give further
substance to the definition of their profession?
7/29/2019 Why Social Movements Now
10/10
References
Canel, Eduardo, 1997, New Social Movement Theory and Resource Mobilisation Theory: the
Need for Integration in M. Kaufman and H.D. Alfonso (eds.) Community, Power and
Grassroots Democracy, London: IDRC and Zed Books.
Hammami, Rema, 1995, NGOs: the professionalisation of politics Race & Class, Vol. 37. Nr.
2, pp 51-63.
Melucci, A., 1989, Nomads of the Present: Social Movements and Individual Needs in
Contemporary Society, Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Minkoff, Debra C., 1994, From Service Provision to Institutional Advocacy: The Shifting
Legitimacy of Organizational Forms' Social Forces 72(4) June. pp 943-969.
Thompson, E.P., 1963, The Making of the English Working Class, New York: Vintage.
Uphoff, Norman, 1995, Why NGOs are not a Third sector: a sectoral Analysis with some
Thoughts on Accountability, Sustainability and Evaluation' in M. Edwards and D. Hulme (eds.)
Non-governmental Organisations. Performance and Accountability, London: Earthscan.
von Freyhold, Michaela, 1987, Labour Movements or Popular Struggles in Africa Review of
African Political EconomySeptember, pp 23-32.