-
CHAPTER TWO. Theoretical Considerations: Explaining Protest
- University of Arizona Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
The reasons why social actors engage in protest or rebellion have been a matter of considerable concern and debate among social scientists. The literature on collective action and social movements remains divided according to economic, political, and ideational explanations of dissent. Early theories of collective behavior emphasized externally induced sociostructural strains and grievances as the principal causes of social discontent and mobilization (Davies 1962; Gurr 1970; Smelser 1962). This approach gave way to a new generation of theorists who emphasized internal factors, such as informal networks, organizations, and resources, as the building blocks of social movements (Gamson 1975; McCarthy and Zald 1977). The political process model evolved as an alternative to both of these approaches, known as the classical and resource mobilization models. Political process theorists emphasized the importance of the broader political system in facilitating or inhibiting movement emergence (McAdam 1982; Tarrow 1989; Tilly 1978). Lastly, the work of new social movement (NSM) theorists has emphasized culture, meaning, and identity as important variables in generating and sustaining collective action (Alvarez, Dagnino , and Escobar 1998). Recently, scholars have sought to craft a theoretical synthesis of the major approaches to the study of collective action, emphasizing political opportunities, mobilizing structures, and cultural framing as components of a comprehensive framework for analyzing the formation and development of protest movements (McAdam, McCarthy, and Zald 1996). A great deal of effort has been expended in analyzing the emergence CHAPTER TWO Theoretical Considerations Explaining Protest 19 of protest movements.1 Comparatively less scholarly attention has been devoted to explaining patterns of protest within and across countries. For instance, why does social protest, when it does occur, take one form and not another? What factors condition the level and extent of protest in a country? What accounts for the strategies and tactics of protesters? These questions are the focus of this chapter. The chapter develops the argument that institutional conditions in conjunction with historic patterns of identity construction frame and constrain the collective action repertoires of social movements.2 I suggest that the degree of party-system institutionalization structures the scope and intensity of societal conflict. Party systems can play an important role in determining whether social discontent is channeled into the political system or is directed against the legitimacy of that system. In the absence of institutionalized channels of social representation , frustrated social actors must resort to pressuring for change from outside the formal political system. However, institutions alone do not determine political outcomes. A more complete explanation of social mobilization should also include an analysis of historic modes of popular political incorporation. By emphasizing both political institutions and identities , this chapter seeks to demonstrate how historical-institutionalist and constructivist approaches can work together. The chapter begins with an overview of the dominant approaches to the study of collective action. The classical and resource mobilization models are examined first, followed by the political process and NSM models. The chapter extends the central insights of the major perspectives on social mobilization, largely developed from European and North American experiences , to a very different time and place. In so doing, the study aims to generate new theoretical and empirical insights into the origins, dynamics, and implications of popular protest. Classical Model The classical model, also known as the sociopsychological approach, focused on the underlying psychological conditions that motivate individuals to engage in collective behavior. The list of conditions attributed to social insurgency by this body of literature includes social alienation, anxiety , frustration, dashed expectations, and relative deprivation (Davies 1962; Kornhauser 1959: Gurr 1970; Smelser 1962). The precipitating factors for these emotional states of being are generally found in the material hardships generated by social inequalities and economic downturns. While classical theorists differ in their specification of the mechanism that causes individuals to rebel, they all share the assumption that protest movements emerge in response to some sort of societal strain or breakdown (Buechler 20 chapter two [44.213.80.174] Project MUSE (2024-03-19 07:54 GMT) 2004). In other words, movements are triggered when social tensions reach a certain threshold or boiling point. From this perspective, social movements consist of discontented individuals who group together to satisfy psychological needs rather than political demands (McAdam 1982, 9). One of the earliest contributors to this school of thought was William Kornhauser (1959). His theory of “mass society” was based on the premise that feelings of social exclusion, isolation, and anomie owing to processes of socioeconomic modernization gave rise to social-protest movements. These movements were...