The Meaning of Social Movements
The Meaning of Social Movements
The Meaning of Social Movements
POLITICAL DEVELOPMENT
Assignment Topic
Submitted By Supervised By
Semester (6th)
Date: 20-03-2019
2
Contents
Issues of social movement in political development ................................ 3
1) The Meaning of Social Movements ...................................................... 3
2) Introduction ........................................................................................... 3
3) The social unrest may be caused by the following factors ................... 3
4) The major units of analysis or major dimensions ................................. 4
5) Conclusion............................................................................................. 6
6) References ............................................................................................. 6
3
According to Anderson and Parker, social movement is “a form of dynamic pluralistic behavior
which progressively develops structure through time and aims at partial or complete modification
of the social order.” Lundberg and others define social movement as, “a voluntary association of
people engaged in concerted efforts to change attitudes, behavior and social relationships in a
larger society.”
Social movements may be of numerous kinds, such as religious movements, reform movements,
or revolutionary movements.
2) Introduction
ability, equality of opportunity for both the sexes, growth of secularism are the examples of
cultural drift.
Social disorganization brings confusion and uncertainty because the old traditions no longer form
a dependable guide to behavior. The individuals become rootless. They feel isolated from the
society. A feeling develops that the community leaders are indifferent to their needs. The
individuals feel insecure, confused and frustrated. Confusion and frustration produce social
movements.
Thus, social movements arise wherever social conditions are favorable. It may be noted that in a
stable, well integrated society there are few social movements. In such a society there are very
few social tensions or alienated groups.
The people are contented. But in a changing and continuously disorganized society the people
suffer from tensions. They are not fully contented. In such a society they perceive social injustice
and become dissatisfied. It is the dissatisfied who build social movements. The modern society is
more afflicted by social movements.
. The typical strategy of social movement analysis has been to examine the adherents and
organizations comprising a social movement. Often the focus has been upon one segment of a
movement--an SMO and its adherents. Resource mobilization theory leads one to focus upon the
relations of movement organization sand adherents to authorities and their agents. Yet such a
focus ignores a central aspect of almost any movement: that a movement very often generates a
5
counter movement that may become independent of the authorities. Much of the mobilization
potential of a movement, its tactics, and its ultimate fate stem from its hatless with a
countermovement; that is true for pro- andante-abortion, the adoption movement, and nuclear
and anti-nuclear power, The theoretical issue is how best to describe this interaction.
McCarthy and Zald introduced the concept of a social movement industry as an analogue to the
economist's concepts of an industry, a group of organizations (firms) offering similar products to
a market of buyers. Social movement industries are all' the SMOs striving for similar change
goals in a society. It should be immediately apparent that the concept alerts us to aspects of
movements largely ignored. Pew movements are dominated by a single organization; send any
sophisticated movement leader recognizes the continuing tension of cooperation and conflict
with other units of the industry. Yet to date we have not had explicit models or propositions to
deal with the issue.
The social movement sector has been defined as the combination of all social movement
industries in a society. McCarthy and Zald (1977) introduce the concept to get at the issues of tile
generalized readiness to support movements for change in a society.
Because of their economist bias and because they largely focus upon the American case, they
mainly discuss how levels of affluence, discretionary time, communication facilities, and
repression act as inhibitors or facilitators of the sector. This is, however, an incomplete approach.
Casual inspection would lead one to note that other societies, seeming as open and rich as ours,
have fewer social movements, and these are differently integrated into the political structure of
society.
6
5) Conclusion
There are numerous and varied causes of social change. Four common causes, as recognized by
social scientists, are technology, social institutions, population, and the environment. All four of
these areas can impact when and how society changes. They are all interrelated: a change in one
area can lead to changes throughout. Modernization is a typical result of social change.
Modernization refers to the process of increased differentiation and specialization within a
society, particularly around its industry and infrastructure.
But American analysts of social movements have shied away from serious attention to ideology,
to symbol systems, their internal socio-psycho logic. Recent developments in semiotics,
hermeneutist, and culture systems, however, may soon make it possible to bridge that gap.
Without attention to meaning systems, analysis of macro structural factors may risk missing the
shaping content of concern of social movement action, with only symbolic analysis we risk
analysis empty of cost, constraint and opportunity.
6) References
https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/50978/204.pdf
Zald; Mayer N. and Roberts Ash, "Social Movement Organizations: Growth, Decline and
Change," in Social Forces 44 (March, 1966), 327-41.
https://opentextbc.ca/introductiontosociology/chapter/chapter21-social-movements-and-
social-change/