Social movement From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, search This article n eeds additional citations

for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and r emoved. (August 2010) The examples and perspective in this article deal primarily with USA and Europe and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject. Please improve this artic le and discuss the issue on the talk page. (May 2012) Sociology Outline Theory History Positivism Antipositivism Functionalism Conflict theory Middle-range Mathematical Critical theory Socialization Structure and agency Research methods Quantitative Qualitative Historical Computational Ethnographic Network analytic

Topics Subfields Cities Class Crime Culture Deviance Demography Education Economy Environment Family Gender Health Industry Internet Knowledge Law Literature Medicine Politics Mobility Race and ethnicity Rational zation Religion Science Secularization Social networks Social psychology Stratif ication Browse Portal Category tree Lists Journals Sociologists Article index v t e Social movements are a type of group action. They are large informal groupings o f individuals or organizations which focus on specific political or social issue s. In other words, they carry out, resist or undo a social change. Modern Western social movements became possible through education (the wider dis semination of literature), and increased mobility of labor due to the industrial ization and urbanization of 19th century societies. It is sometimes argued that the freedom of expression, education and relative economic independence prevalen t in the modern Western culture are responsible for the unprecedented number and scope of various contemporary social movements. However, others point out that many of the social movements of the last hundred years grew up, like the Mau Mau in Kenya, to oppose Western colonialism. Either way, social movements have been and continued to be closely connected with democratic political systems. Occasi onally, social movements have been involved in democratizing nations, but more o ften they have flourished after democratization. Over the past 200 years, they h ave become part of a popular and global expression of dissent.[1]

Modern movements often utilize technology and the internet to mobilize people gl obally. Adapting to communication trends is a common theme among successful move ments. Political science and sociology have developed a variety of theories and empiric al research on social movements. For example, some research in political science highlights the relation between popular movements and the formation of new poli tical parties as well as discussing the function of social movements in relation to agenda setting and influence on politics. Contents [hide] 1 Definition 2 History 2.1 Key processes 3 Types of social movement 4 Identification of supporters 5 Dynamics of social movements 6 Social movement theories 6.1 Deprivation theory 6.2 Marxist theory 6.3 Mass society theory 6.4 Structural strain theory 6.5 Resource mobilization theory 6.6 Political process theory 6.7 Culture theory 7 Social movement and social networking 8 See also 9 References 10 Further reading 11 External links [edit] DefinitionCharles Tilly defines social movements as a series of contentio us performances, displays and campaigns by which ordinary people make collective claims on others .[1] For Tilly, social movements are a major vehicle for ordin ary people's participation in public politics.[2] He argues that there are three major elements to a social movement:[1] 1.Campaigns: a sustained, organized public effort making collective claims of ta rget authorities; 2.Repertoire (repertoire of contention): employment of combinations from among t he following forms of political action: creation of special-purpose associations and coalitions, public meetings, solemn processions, vigils, rallies, demonstra tions, petition drives, statements to and in public media, and pamphleteering; a nd 3.WUNC displays: participants' concerted public representation of worthiness, un ity, numbers, and commitments on the part of themselves and/or their constituenc ies. Sidney Tarrow defines a social movement as collective challenges [to elites, aut horities, other groups or cultural codes] by people with common purposes and sol idarity in sustained interactions with elites, opponents and authorities. He spe cifically distinguishes social movements from political parties and advocacy gro ups.[3] [edit] History American Civil Rights Movement is one of the most famous social movements of the 20th century. Here, Martin Luther King is giving his "I Have a Dream" speech, i n front of the Lincoln Memorial during the 1963 March on Washington for Jobs and FreedomThe term "social movements" was introduced in 1848 by the German Sociolo gist Lorenz von Stein in his book Socialist and Communist Movements since the Th

ird French Revolution (1848) in which he introduced the term "social movement" i nto scholarly discussions - actually depicting in this way political movements f ighting for the social rights understood as welfare rights. Tilly argues that the early growth of social movements was connected to broad ec onomic and political changes including parliamentarization, market capitalizatio n, and proletarianization.[1] Political movements that evolved in late 18th cent ury, like those connected to the French Revolution and the Polish Constitution o f May 3, 1791 are among the first documented social movements, although Tilly no tes that the British abolitionist movement has "some claim" to be the first soci al movement (becoming one between the sugar boycott of 1791 and the second great petition drive of 1806). The labor movement and socialist movement of the late 19th century are seen as the prototypical social movements, leading to the forma tion of communist and social democratic parties and organisations. From 1815, Br itain after victory in the Napoleonic Wars entered a period of social upheaval. Similar tendencies were seen in other countries as pressure for reform continued , for example in Russia with the Russian Revolution of 1905 and of 1917, resulti ng in the collapse of the Czarist regime around the end of the First World War. In 1945, Britain after victory in the Second World War entered a period of radic al reform and change. In the post-war period, women's rights, gay rights, peace, civil rights, anti-nuclear and environmental movements emerged, often dubbed th e New Social Movements [4] They led, among other things, to the formation of gre en parties and organisations influenced by the new left. Some find in the end of the 1990s the emergence of a new global social movement, the anti-globalization movement. Some social movement scholars posit that with the rapid pace of globa lization, the potential for the emergence of new type of social movement is late ntthey make the analogy to national movements of the past to describe what has be en termed a global citizens movement. [edit] Key processesSeveral key processes lie behind the history of social movem ents. Urbanization led to larger settlements, where people of similar goals coul d find each other, gather and organize. This facilitated social interaction betw een scores of people, and it was in urban areas that those early social movement s first appeared. Similarly, the process of industrialization which gathered lar ge masses of workers in the same region explains why many of those early social movements addressed matters such as economic wellbeing, important to the worker class. Many other social movements were created at universities, where the proce ss of mass education brought many people together. With the development of commu nication technologies, creation and activities of social movements became easier - from printed pamphlets circulating in the 18th century coffeehouses to newspa pers and Internet, all those tools became important factors in the growth of the social movements. Finally, the spread of democracy and political rights like th e freedom of speech made the creation and functioning of social movements much e asier. [edit] Types of social movement Types of social movements.[5]Sociologists distinguish between several types of s ocial movement: Scope: reform movement - movements advocating changing some norms or laws. Examples of such a movement would include a trade union with a goal of increasing workers ri ghts, a green movement advocating a set of ecological laws, or a movement suppor ting introduction of a capital punishment or the right to abortion. Some reform movements may aim for a change in custom and moral norms, such as condemnation o f pornography or proliferation of some religion. radical movement - movements dedicated to changing value systems in a fundamenta l way. Examples would include the American Civil Rights Movement which demanded full civil rights and equality under the law to all Americans, regardless of rac

e; the Polish Solidarity (Solidarno) movement which demanded the transformation of a Stalinist political and economic system into a democracy; or the South Africa n shack dwellers' movement Abahlali baseMjondolo which demands the full inclusio n of shack dwellers into the life of cities. Type of change: innovation movement - movements which want to introduce or change particular nor ms, values, etc. The singularitarianism movement advocating deliberate action to effect and ensure the safety of the technological singularity is an example of an innovation movement. conservative movement - movements which want to preserve existing norms, values, etc. For example, the anti-technology 19th century Luddites movement or the mod ern movement opposing the spread of the genetically modified food could be seen as conservative movements in that they aimed to fight specific technological cha nges. Targets: group-focus movements - focused on affecting groups or society in general, for e xample, advocating the change of the political system. Some of these groups tran sform into or join a political party, but many remain outside the reformist part y political system. individual-focused movements - focused on affecting individuals. Most religious movements would fall under this category. Methods of work: peaceful movements - various movements which use nonviolent means of protest as part of a campaign of nonviolent resistance, also often called civil resistance. The American Civil Rights movement, Polish Solidarity movement or the nonviolen t, civil disobedience-orientated wing of the Indian independence movement would fall into this category.[6] 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 organ ization. Examples: the Rote Armee Fraktion, Al-Qaida. Old and new: old movements - movements for change have existed for many centuries. Most of th e oldest recognized movements, dating to late 18th and 19th centuries, fought fo r specific social groups, such as the working class, peasants, whites, aristocra ts, Protestants, men. They were usually centered around some materialistic goals like improving the standard of living or, for example, the political autonomy o f 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 movemen t, environmental movement, free software movement, gay rights movement, peace mo vement, anti-nuclear movement, alter-globalization movement, etc. Sometimes they are known as new social movements. 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 g oals. Movements such as the first (where Marx and Bakunin met), second, third an d fourth internationals, the World Social Forum, the Peoples' Global Action and the anarchist movement seek to change society at a global level. local movements - most of the social movements have a local scope.[7] They are f ocused on local or regional objectives, such as protecting a specific natural ar ea, lobbying for the lowering of tolls in a certain motorway, or preserving a bu ilding about to be demolished for gentrification and turning it into a social ce nter. [edit] Identification of supportersA difficulty for scholarship of movements is that for most of them, neither insiders to a movement nor outsiders apply consis tent labels or even descriptive phrases. Unless there is a single leader who doe s that, or a formal system of membership agreements, activists will typically us e diverse labels and descriptive phrases that require scholars to discern when t hey are referring to the same or similar ideas, declare similar goals, adopt sim ilar programs of action, and use similar methods. There can be great differences

in the way that is done, to recognize who is and who is not a member or an alli ed group: Insiders: Often exaggerate the level of support by considering people supporters whose level of activity or support is weak, but also reject those that outsider s might consider supporters because they discredit the cause, or are even seen a s adversaries. Outsiders: Those not supporters who may tend to either underestimate or overesti mate the level or support or activity of elements of a movement, by including or excluding those that insiders would exclude or include. It is often outsiders rather than insiders that apply the identifying labels for a movement, which the insiders then may or may not adopt and use to self-identi fy. For example, the label for the levellers political movement in 17th century England was applied to them by their antagonists, as a term of disparagement. Ye t admirers of the movement and its aims later came to use the term, and it is th e term by which they are known to history. Caution must always be exercised in any discussion of amorphous phenomena such a s movements to distinguish between the views of insiders and outsiders, supporte rs and antagonists, each of whom may have their own purposes and agendas in char acterization or mischaracterization of it. [edit] Dynamics of social movements Stages of social movements.[8]Social movements are not eternal. They have a life cycle: they are created, they grow, they achieve successes or failures and even tually, they dissolve and cease to exist. They are more likely to evolve in the time and place which is friendly to the so cial movements: hence their evident symbiosis with the 19th century proliferatio n of ideas like individual rights, freedom of speech and civil disobedience. Soc ial movements occur in liberal and authoritarian societies but in different form s. However there must always be polarizing differences between groups of people: in case of 'old movements', they were the poverty and wealth gaps. In case of t he 'new movements', they are more likely to be the differences in customs, ethic s and values. Finally, the birth of a social movement needs what sociologist Nei l Smelser calls an initiating event: a particular, individual event that will be gin a chain reaction of events in the given society leading to the creation of a social movement. For example, American Civil Rights movement grew on the reacti on to black woman, Rosa Parks, riding in the whites-only section of the bus (alt hough she was not acting alone or spontaneouslytypically activist leaders lay the groundwork behind the scenes of interventions designed to spark a movement). Th e Polish Solidarity movement, which eventually toppled the communist regimes of Eastern Europe, developed after trade union activist Anna Walentynowicz was fire d from work. The South African shack dwellers' movement Abahlali baseMjondolo gr ew out of a road blockade in response to the sudden selling off of a small piece of land promised for housing to a developer. Such an event is also described as a volcanic model - a social movement is often created after a large number of p eople realize that there are others sharing the same value and desire for a part icular social change. One of the main difficulties facing the emerging social movement is spreading th e very knowledge that it exists. Second is overcoming the free rider problem - c onvincing people to join it, instead of following the mentality 'why should I tr ouble myself when others can do it and I can just reap the benefits after their hard work'. Many social movements are created around some charismatic leader, i.e. one posse ssing charismatic authority. After the social movement is created, there are two likely phases of recruitment. The first phase will gather the people deeply int erested in the primary goal and ideal of the movement. The second phase, which w

ill usually come after the given movement had some successes and is trendy; it w ould look good on a rsum. People who join in this second phase will likely be the first to leave when the movement suffers any setbacks and failures. Eventually, the social crisis can be encouraged by outside elements, like opposi tion from government or other movements. However, many movements had survived a failure crisis, being revived by some hardcore activists even after several deca des. [edit] Social movement theoriesSociologists have developed several theories rela ted to social movements [Kendall, 2005]. Some of the better-known approaches are outlined below. Chronologically they include: collective behavior/collective action theories (1950s) relative deprivation theory (1960s) marxist theory (1880s) value-added theory (1960s) resource mobilization (1970s) frame analysis theory (1980s) (closely related to social constructionist theory) new social movement theory (1980s) political process theory (1980s) [edit] Deprivation theoryDeprivation theory argues that social movements have th eir foundations among people who feel deprived of some good(s) or resource(s). A ccording to this approach, individuals who are lacking some good, service, or co mfort are more likely to organize a social movement to improve (or defend) their conditions.[9] There are two significant problems with this theory. First, since most people fe el deprived at one level or another almost all the time, the theory has a hard t ime explaining why the groups that form social movements do when other people ar e also deprived. Second, the reasoning behind this theory is circular - often th e only evidence for deprivation is the social movement. If deprivation is claime d to be the cause but the only evidence for such is the movement, the reasoning is circular.[10] [edit] Marxist theoryDerived from Karl Marx, Marxism as an ideology and theory o f social change has had an immense impact on the practice and the analysis of so cial movements. Marxism arose from an analysis of movements structured by confli cts between industrial workers and their capitalist employers in the 19th centur y. In the twentieth century a variety of neo-Marxist theories have been develope d that have opened themselves to adding questions of race, gender, environment, and other issues to an analysis centered in (shifting) political economic condit ions. Class-based movements, both revolutionary and labor-reformist, have always been stronger in Europe than in the US and so has Marxist theory as a tool for understanding social movements, but important Marxist movements and theories hav e also evolved in the US. Marxist approaches have been and remain influential wa ys of understanding the role of political economy and class differences as key f orces in many historical and current social movements, and they continue to chal lenge approaches that are limited by their inability to imagine serious alternat ives to consumer capitalist social structures. [edit] Mass society theoryMass society theory argues that social movements are m ade up of individuals in large societies who feel insignificant or socially deta ched. Social movements, according to this theory, provide a sense of empowerment and belonging that the movement members would otherwise not have.[11] Very little support has been found for this theory. Aho (1990), in his study of Idaho Christian Patriotism, did not find that members of that movement were more likely to have been socially detached. In fact, the key to joining the movement was having a friend or associate who was a member of the movement.

[edit] Structural strain theorySocial strain theory, also known as value-added t heory, proposes six factors that encourage social movement development:[12] 1.structural conduciveness - people come to believe their society has problems 2.structural strain - people experience deprivation 3.growth and spread of a solution - a solution to the problems people are experi encing is proposed and spreads 4.precipitating factors - discontent usually requires a catalyst (often a specif ic event) to turn it into a social movement 5.lack of social control - the entity that is to be changed must be at least som ewhat open to the change; if the social movement is quickly and powerfully repre ssed, it may never materialize 6.mobilization - this is the actual organizing and active component of the movem ent; people do what needs to be done This theory is also subject to circular reasoning as it incorporates, at least i n part, deprivation theory and relies upon it, and social/structural strain for the underlying motivation of social movement activism. However, social movement activism is, like in the case of deprivation theory, often the only indication t hat there was strain or deprivation. [edit] Resource mobilization theoryResource mobilization theory emphasizes the i mportance of resources in social movement development and success. Resources are understood here to include: knowledge, money, media, labor, solidarity, legitim acy, and internal and external support from power elite. The theory argues that social movements develop when individuals with grievances are able to mobilize s ufficient resources to take action. The emphasis on resources offers an explanat ion why some discontented/deprived individuals are able to organize while others are not. Some of the assumptions of the theory include: there will always be grounds for protest in modern, politically pluralistic soci eties because there is constant discontent (i.e., grievances or deprivation); th is de-emphasizes the importance of these factors as it makes them ubiquitous actors are rational; they weigh the costs and benefits from movement participati on members are recruited through networks; commitment is maintained by building a c ollective identity and continuing to nurture interpersonal relationships movement organization is contingent upon the aggregation of resources social movement organizations require resources and continuity of leadership social movement entrepreneurs and protest organizations are the catalysts which transform collective discontent into social movements; social movement organizat ions form the backbone of social movements the form of the resources shapes the activities of the movement (e.g., access to a TV station will result in the extensive use TV media) movements develop in contingent opportunity structures that influence their effo rts to mobilize; as each movement's response to the opportunity structures depen ds on the movement's organization and resources, there is no clear pattern of mo vement development nor are specific movement techniques or methods universal Critics of this theory argue that there is too much of an emphasize on resources , especially financial resources. Some movements are effective without an influx of money and are more dependent upon the movement members for time and labor (e .g., the civil rights movement in the U.S.). [edit] Political process theoryPolitical process theory is similar to resource m obilization in many regards, but tends to emphasize a different component of soc ial structure that is important for social movement development: political oppor tunities. Political process theory argues that there are three vital components for movement formation: insurgent consciousness, organizational strength, and po

litical opportunities. Insurgent consciousness refers back to the ideas of deprivation and grievances. The idea is that certain members of society feel like they are being mistreated or that somehow the system is unjust. The insurgent consciousness is the collect ive sense of injustice that movement members (or potential movement members) fee l and serves as the motivation for movement organization. Photo taken at the 2005 U.S. Presidential inauguration protest.Organizational st rength falls inline with resource-mobilization theory, arguing that in order for a social movement to organize it must have strong leadership and sufficient res ources. Political opportunity refers to the receptivity or vulnerability of the existing political system to challenge. This vulnerability can be the result of any of t he following (or a combination thereof): growth of political pluralism decline in effectiveness of repression elite disunity; the leading factions are internally fragmented a broadening of access to institutional participation in political processes support of organized opposition by elites One of the advantages of the political process theory is that it addresses the i ssue of timing or emergence of social movements. Some groups may have the insurg ent consciousness and resources to mobilize, but because political opportunities are closed, they will not have any success. The theory, then, argues that all t hree of these components are important. Critics of the political process theory and resource-mobilization theory point o ut that neither theory discusses movement culture to any great degree. This has presented culture theorists an opportunity to expound on the importance of cultu re. One advance on the political process theory is the political mediation model, wh ich outlines the way in which the political context facing movement actors inter sects with the strategic choices that movements make. An additional strength of this model is that it can look at the outcomes of social movements not only in t erms of success or failure but also in terms of consequences (whether intentiona l or unintentional, positive or negative) and in terms of collective benefits. [edit] Culture theoryMore recent strains of theory understand social movements t hrough their cultures - collectively shared beliefs, ideologies, values and othe r meanings about the world. These include explorations into the "collective iden tities" and "collective action frames" of movements and movement organizations. Culture theory builds upon both the political process and resource-mobilization theories but extends them in two ways. First, it emphasizes the importance of mo vement culture. Second, it attempts to address the free-rider problem. Both resource-mobilization theory and political process theory include a sense o f injustice in their approaches. Culture theory brings this sense of injustice t o the forefront of movement creation by arguing that, in order for social moveme nts to successfully mobilize individuals, they must develop an injustice frame. An injustice frame is a collection of ideas and symbols that illustrate both how significant the problem is as well as what the movement can do to alleviate it, "Like a picture frame, an issue frame marks off some part of the world. Like a b uilding frame, it holds things together. It provides coherence to an array of sy mbols, images, and arguments, linking them through an underlying organizing idea

that suggests what is essential - what consequences and values are at stake. We do not see the frame directly, but infer its presence by its characteristic exp ressions and language. Each frame gives the advantage to certain ways of talking and thinking, while it places others out of the picture."[13] Important characteristics of the injustice frames include:[14] Facts take on their meaning by being embedded in frames, which render them relev ant and significant or irrelevant and trivial. People carry around multiple frames in their heads. Successful reframing involves the ability to enter into the worldview of our adv ersaries. All frames contain implicit or explicit appeals to moral principles. In emphasizing the injustice frame, culture theory also addresses the free-rider problem. The free-rider problem refers to the idea that people will not be moti vated to participate in a social movement that will use up their personal resour ces (e.g., time, money, etc.) if they can still receive the benefits without par ticipating. In other words, if person X knows that movement Y is working to impr ove environmental conditions in his neighborhood, he is presented with a choice: join or not join the movement. If he believes the movement will succeed without him, he can avoid participation in the movement, save his resources, and still reap the benefits - this is free-riding. A significant problem for social moveme nt theory has been to explain why people join movements if they believe the move ment can/will succeed without their contribution. Culture theory argues that, in conjunction with social networks being an important contact tool, the injustice frame will provide the motivation for people to contribute to the movement. Framing processes includes three separate components: Diagnostic frame: the movement organization frames what is the problem or what t hey are critiquing Prognostic frame: the movement organization frames what is the desirable solutio n to the problem Motivational frame: the movement organization frames a "call to arms" by suggest ing and encouraging that people take action to solve the problem [edit] Social movement and social networkingMany discussions have been generated recently on the topic of social networking and the effect it may play on the fo rmation and mobilization of social movement.[15] For example, the emergence of t he Coffee Party first appeared on the social networking site, Facebook. The part y has continued to gather membership and support through that site and file shar ing sites, such as Flickr. The 20092010 Iranian election protests also demonstrat ed how social networking sites are making the mobilization of large numbers of p eople quicker and easier. Iranians were able to organize and speak out against t he election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad by using sites such as Twitter and Facebook. This in turn prompted widespread government censorship of the web and social net working sites. The sociological study of social movements is quite new. The traditional view of movements often perceived them as chaotic and disorganized, treating activism a s a threat to the social order. The activism experienced in the 1960s and 1970s shuffled in a new world opinion about the subject. Models were now introduced to understand the organizational and structural powers embedded in social movement s. [edit] See alsoAnti-jock movement Civil resistance Countermovement Global citizens movement List of social movements Moral shocks Nonviolent resistance

Political movement Reform movement Revolutionary movement Social defence Social equality Teaching for social justice Union organizer [edit] References1.^ a b c d Tilly, 2004 2.^ Tilly, 2004, p.3 3.^ Tarrow, 1994 4.^ Westd, David B. "New Social Movements." Knowledge Center. WordPress. Built o n the Thematic Theme Framework., 16 July 2004. Web. 23 Feb. 2012. <http://www.om nilogos.com/2011/06/28/new-social-movements/>. 5.^ Aberle, David F. 1966. The Peyote Religion among the Navaho. Chicago: Aldine . ISBN 0-8061-2382-6 6.^ Roberts, Adam and Timothy Garton Ash (eds.), Civil Resistance and Power Poli tics: The Experience of Non-violent Action from Gandhi to the Present, Oxford: O xford University Press, 2009. ISBN 978-0-19-955201-6, contains chapters on these and many other social movements using non-violent methods.[1] 7.^ Snow, David A., Sarah Anne Soule, Hanspeter Kriesi. The Blackwell companion to social movements. Wiley-Blackwell. 2004. ISBN 0-631-22669-9 Google Print, p.4 8.^ Graph based on Blumer, Herbert G. 1969. "Collective Behavior." In Alfred McC lung Lee, ed., Principles of Sociology. Third Edition. New York: Barnes and Nobl e Books, pp. 65-121; Mauss, Armand L. 1975. Social Problems as Social Movements. Philadelphia: Lippincott; and Tilly, Charles. 1978. From Mobilization to Revolu tion. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley, 1978. 9.^ Morrison 1978 10.^ Jenkins and Perrow 1977 11.^ Kornhauser 1959 12.^ Smelser 1962 13.^ Ryan and Gamson 2006, p.14 14.^ Ryan and Gamson 2006 15.^ Shirky, Clay. Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organiz ations. Penguin Press HC, The, 2008. Print. [edit] Further readingDavid F. Aberle 1966. The Peyote Religion among the Navaho . Chicago: Aldine. ISBN 0-8061-2382-6 James Alfred Aho. 1990. Politics of Righteousness: Idaho Christian Patriotism. W ashington: University of Washington Press. ISBN 0-295-96997-0 Herbert G. Blumer 1969. "Collective Behavior." In Alfred McClung Lee, ed., Princ iples of Sociology. Third Edition. New York: Barnes and Noble Books, pp. 65121. Mark Chaves. 1997. Ordaining Women: Culture and Conflict in Religious Organizati ons. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. ISBN 0-674-64146-9 Graeme Chesters, & Ian Welsh. Complexity and Social Movements: Multitudes at the Edge of Chaos Routledge 2006. ISBN 0-415-43974-4 Mario Diani and Doug McAdam, Social movements and networks, Oxford University Pr ess, 2003. Susan Eckstei, ed. Power and Popular Protest: Latin American Social Movements, U pdated Edition, University of California Press 2001. ISBN 0-520-22705-0 Anthony Giddens. 1985. The Nation-State and Violence. Cambridge, England: Polity Press. ISBN 0-520-06039-3 J. Craig Jenkins and Charles Perrow. 1977. Insurgency of the Powerless Farm Work er Movements (19461972). American Sociological Review. 42(2):249-268. Diana Kendall, Sociology In Our Times, Thomson Wadsworth, 2005. ISBN 0-534-64629 -8 William Kornhauser. 1959. The Politics of Mass Society. New York: Free Press. IS BN 0-02-917620-4 Donna Maurer. 2002. Vegetarianism: Movement or Moment? Philadelphia: Temple Univ ersity Press. ISBN 1-56639-936-X Armand L. Mauss. 1975. Social Problems of Social Movements. Philadelphia: Lippin cott.

Denton E. Morrison. 1978. "Some Notes toward Theory on Relative Deprivation, Soc ial Movements, and Social Change." In Louis E. Genevie, ed., Collective Behavior and Social Movements. Itasca, Ill.: Peacock. pp. 202209. Immanuel Ness, ed. Encyclopedia of American Social Movements, 2004. ISBN 0-76568045-9. Adam Roberts and Timothy Garton Ash (eds.), Civil Resistance and Power Politics: The Experience of Non-violent Action from Gandhi to the Present, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. ISBN 978-0-19-955201-6. [2] Charlotte Ryan and William W. Gamson, The Art of Reframing Political Debates. Co ntexts. 2006; 5(1):13-18. Neil J. Smelser, 1962. Theory of Collective Behavior. New York: Free Press. ISBN 0-02-929390-1 David Snow, Sarah A. Soule and Hanspeter Kriesi, ed. Blackwell Companion to Soci al Movements, Blackwell, 2004. Suzanne Staggenborg, Social Movements, Oxford University Press, 2008. ISBN 978-0 -19-542309-9 Sidney Tarrow, Power in Movement: Collective Action, Social Movements and Politi cs, Cambridge University Press, 1994. ISBN 0-521-42271-X Charles Tilly, 1978. From Mobilization to Revolution. Reading, Massachusetts: Ad dison-Wesley, 1978. Charles Tilly, Social Movements, 17682004, Boulder, CO, Paradigm Publishers, 2004 262 pp. ISBN 1-59451-042-3 (hardback) / ISBN 1-59451-043-1 (paperback) "Draft:Social Movements." - TriasWiki. Web. 23 Feb. 2012. <http://wiki.triastele matica.org/index.php/Draft:Social_movements> "Dictionary - Definition of Social Movement." Webster's Online Dictionary. Web. 23 Feb. 2012. <http://www.websters-online-dictionary.org/definitions/Social%20Mo vement>. "Sociology of Religion." Social Movement Theory and the : Toward a New Synthesis . Web. 23 Feb. 2012. <http://socrel.oxfordjournals.org/content/52/4/311.abstract >. "GSDRC: Display." GSDRC: Governance and Social Development Resource Centre. Web. 23 Feb. 2012. <http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display> "SOCIAL MOVEMENT THEORIES." Web. 23 Feb. 2012. <http://stmarys.ca/~evanderveen/w vdv/social_change/social_movement_theories.htm> "Trent University :: Theory, Culture and Politics." Trent University. Web. 23 Fe b. 2012. <http://www.trentu.ca/theorycentre/> "Resource Mobilization and New Social Theory." University of Victoria. Web. 23 F eb. 2012. <http://web.uvic.ca/~stucraw/Lethbridge/MyArticles/ResourceMobilizatio n.htm> "Structural Strain Theories." Structural Strain Theories. Web. 23 Feb. 2012. <ht tp://www.umsl.edu/~keelr/200/strain.html>. Marco G. Giugni, How Social Movements Matter, University of Minnesota Press, 199 9, ISBN 0-8166-2914-5 Rod Bantjes, Social Movements in a Global Context, CSPI, 2007, ISBN 978-1-55130324-6 Michael Barker, Conform or Reform? Social Movements and the Mass Media, Fifth-Es tate-Online - International Journal of Radical Mass Media Criticism. February 20 07. Fith-estate-online.co.uk Dennis Chong, "Collective Action and the Civil Rights Movement", University of C hicago Press, 1991, ISBN 978-0-226-10441-6 [edit] External linksASA section on Collective Behavior and Social Movements Mobilization journal Research in Social Movements, Conflicts and Change journal Social Movement Studies: Journal of Social, Cultural and Political Protest Interface: a Journal For and About Social Movements RevolutionArt Movement Social Movements: A Summary of What Works (pdf) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Social_movement&oldid= 524231084" Help improve this pageWhat's this?What's this? Wikipedia would like to hear what

you think of this article. Share your feedback with the editors and help improve this page. Learn more >> Did you find what you were looking for? Yes, I found what I was looking for.Yes No, I did not find what I was looking fo r.No Please post helpful feedback. By posting, you agree to transparency under these terms. Post your feedback Categories: Community buildingIdentity politicsSocial movemen tsHidden categories: Articles needing additional references from August 2010All articles needing additional referencesArticles with limited geographic scope fro m May 2012Pages in non-existent country centric categoriesSociology index