I think that one of the most common forms of social movement are those which follow the deprivation theory. The deprivation theory maintains that social movements happen when people feel deprived of something whether that something be pay, political rights or unhappiness with the government. Over the past 20 years, we have seen many labor unions go on strike as a way of protesting against the wages and or benefits their employers provide them with. Every February, thousands of pro-life advocates participate in the March For Life, advocating the rights of the unborn and protesting against abortion. Both these demonstrations involve crowds of people expressing their opinion in a very visible and unified way. I think you could even say that the founding of the United States followed Deprivation theory: the colonists believed that England was not preserving their rights as Englishmen and was violating their right to govern themselves. As we know, this was the dominant public opinion of many of the colonists and it resulted in political reform through revolution! thestig001
You gave a great example of the Deprivation Theory. People that are pro-life and the founding of America are two circumstances that really brought people together because they felt they were deprived of something. The colonists that came from England showed also relative deprivation because they are just disadvantaged compared to the royalty back in England, but not the most disadvantaged people ever. swimmer001
You have explained social movement and the deprivation theory well here. I agree with you on how strikes are being made for jobs because of the wages and people being layed off too. This is natural for people to express their opinions verbally and in unification. When something does't go our way we tend to act together as one a fight for oursleves. There can be legal consequences for these acts but we are expressing our opinion of free will. Summer001
I agree with your post and swimmers comment. I like the way you used pro-life activists and the founding of America, it made things a little more clear for me. When it comes to the pro-life activist they are usually peaceful with their protesting which, I believe helps their cause even more. I believe that when social movements are peaceful they get further in what they are hoping to accomplish. Toby001
I agree stig another movement that is soon to come is the right to bare tattoos in the military. A month ago congress passed a law stating anyone with tattoos will not be accepted into any branch of the military however the ones already there with tattoos have to stay and fulfill their time which is relative to the deprivation theory. TooTall001
Social movements are not just a group of people with an idea. They are a group of people who have an idea, but have the resources to back up their idea. Social movements can also encourage or discourage social change. The Resource-Mobilization Theory says that there is not a chance for a social movement to happen without substantial resources. I thought it was interesting how the video said that social movements can effect people outside of them. Collective behavior, like panics, can be formed because of social movements. This kind of reminds me of rumors. If someone starts a rumor then everyone gets worried that the rumors are true. swimemr001
I disagree with the tenet of the Resource-Mobilization Theory that says you have to have substantial resources for a social change to happen. The example that I would cite would be the hippie movement and sexual revolution during the 60's 70's. I don't think that hippies really had any backers or people providing them with money, but the sheer number of people that joined in the movement and lived the lifestyle of "peace and free love" made for some large societal change. I think many people may have just jumped on the bandwagon of living that lifestyle because of peer pressure. That lifestyle definitely attracted a younger demographic of people. Secondly, even the people who didn't join in had to deal with the effects of all these people living this way who were challenging the social norms. The rest of society was forced to either accept these norms or reject them. The fruit of this movement (which didn't really have any resources or money, just a shared way of life) thus helped spark the controversies of the sexual revolution. thestig001
Swimmer: Just like rumors and gossip even when the information that is being shared might not be accurate, people believe it to be true most times more than not. This just goes to show you how powerful language is in our society. Rumors can ruin people's lives. Public opinions about people or how things are being done can make a huge change in either a negative or positive direction. You get enough people in one place; a crowd or mob people can make a gigantic impact on social change just by the size of the group. More support a particular subject or cause gets ideally the better the outcome, the more they are heard. WonderWoman001
Regarding the hippie revolution that was brought up, I don't think your example holds up under scrutiny. What you are not taking into account is how human beings are in and of themselves a resource. Additionally, the sheer number of people that joined the movement would have brought even more resources to bear for the progress of the movement. There doesn't need to be a couple of really rich backers if everyone in the movement helped out. The very act of living their hippie lifestyle was an expression of the use of their resource of free will. FreedomUnderGod001
I think you do a great job comparing social movements to rumors. In almost any rumor you must think of it to hold some value in order to pass it along. In the chapter, it discusses says rumors are unstable, difficult to stop, thrives in a climate of uncertainty. The climate of uncertainty that rumors thrive in doesn't have any reliable reasoning to be followed in my opinion. I think we're getting to a point a where we're starting to know what's a reason to stand up for certain movements. Taylojj2
I do find it interesting that more men take part in public life, leading many social movements. But nowadays they are seeing more women leading the path as well suggesting more gender equality. I believe that all of the different types of social movements could have an impact of one way or another on our society. The one that I think is so important is the political-economy theory. These movements begin when in capitalist countries' economic system fails to meet the needs of the majority of the people. For example in the U.S. society is in a crisis with people not being able to find good jobs, living below the poverty line, and living without health insurance. Social movements arise as a response to such conditions. And like the video above said whether or not positive or negative results come from the movement itself, people's message got out irregardless. WonderWoman001
I like your comment about social movements. I agree with your statement that different types of social movements could have an impact on our society especially the political economy theory. I defiantly agree that social movements arise as a response to crisis. I think it is interesting that a group of people with the same idea can come together and try for social change. I think this is an important part of our society in the United States. SVT001.
I don't think we can choose a type of social movement we would like to have or which we find more effective. All these theories are not different types of social movements but rather different ways we can observe and understand a social movement. When you say that that one is more important than another what I think you actually mean is that this particular theory lines most strongly with how you observe and understand social movements. Karma001
Wonderwoman001 The fact that men lead many social movements doesn’t surprise me but I feel like with woman joining the movement there will be many more ideas that can come into play with both genders and have a big impact on our society, I can definitely agree with that. As well as the political economy theory it is one of the strongest theories that play an important role in our society. LAWS001
I think that social movements are very interesting. It takes a good leadership and a lot of dedication. Social movements also require great organization. When you think of a social movement you think of an idea that only a few posses but as time goes on more people agree with the idea. I think the most interesting part of the social movements is that the social movements become a part of the bureaucracy that they were trying to change. I think it would be a really good experience to be an active part of a social movement. Most people in society I feel like are affected by social movements, but have little to do with them. Today our social movements are not as big and profound like Martin Luther King, but I do think we still have some great things that we need to strive for in our culture. SVT001.
I agree with you that social movements requires great organization. They have to be organized because they can't be insensitive to any particular group.There are not as many profound and big has movements such as one headed by Martin Luther King, cause it seems like there are not so many big problems like how it used to be earlier. khush001
I find it slightly humorous that we have sociological terms or definitions for social movements. Whenever we define something we are limiting a symbol (i.e. a spoken or written word and the like) to a certain substance, function or purpose. For example we define a chair by limiting its function to piece of furniture used for resting on. Now when we define social movements, especially those that are combatting social norms, we are in essence limiting or restricting it to a specific substance, function or purpose. The seven theories of social movements all demonstrate my point, I’m lazy so I’ll only use one example. Our textbook defines mass-society theory as the following, “People who lack social ties are mobilized into social movements. Periods of social breakdown are likely to spawn social movements. The social movement gives members a sense of belonging and social participation.” The first two sentences limit the substance of a social movement to socially isolated people. The last sentence limits a movement's purpose to serving as source of belonging. Both generalize and restrict the perception of a social movements. I think I’ll just end my thoughts here. Karma001
I believe a group of people with same certain attitudes could shape a group of society. Symbols can shape a society better then definitions do now. Social movement with from my three different groups or stages, These types of social movements depend on certain variables like, who is changed? How much has changed? These movements are common in the Modern world and are still cahnging but they can decline in the movement. Society still can get by without these movements, these movements give us a kick start. We use each other to create social movement and to share problems or issues so an action can be taken among these groups. Gender plays a role in social movement. Men tend to take more of a role in social movement. Women have played a small role in social movement including the feminist movement and the ablolitionist but men have seemed to take more of a role. Both men and women tother have played a role in social movement but men just alone have played the biggest role yet. Summer001
I think a good point that was made in this video was how it is difficult to get social movement going if you do not have resources. I think there is some truth to the Resource Mobilization-Theory because yes the hippies in sixties probably did not have a lot of money but, they did have the resource of the media. In the sixties the hippies or free spirited people were all of the news and newspaper. Therefore, I believe that even if you do not have money to support your cause you at least need to media or else no one will hear about your struggles or resolutions to your cause. Toby001
Finances play a giant role in succes/failure of a movement, but organization is key also. The hippie movement had little social cohesion. I think there were too many competing ideas within the collective behavior of the counterculture movement. It was a free for all. They were successful in some ways, but would have progressed further with a structured set of ideals. Packers001
When discussing social movements and collective behavior; I am thankful for the rights, as an American, to peaceful assembly and freedom of expression. Many societies do not afford their citizens these rights. We take this for granted. Much of the social change that we Americans have witnessed are due to our constitutional rights, and would otherwise not be possible. I think of the multitude of civil riots we have seen, over the previous years, in Europe because of low economic conditions; they appear to have had little effect. One example here, the occupy wallstreet movement was big for a moment, but faded quickly without real change. Is this because of poor resource mobilization or failed collective significance? Maybe these movements were just to unpopular to succeed. Maybe only the truly necessary and relevant issues effect change like civil liberties and social equality. Packers001
In regards to the wall street movement a few years ago, I think that the failure was due to that what they were trying to protest was such a minority view that no-one wanted to supply them. By supply them I mean a business backing them up and putting out a statement that they support them in what they are trying to do. Also they didn't have any money to do anything about what they were protesting. They were trying to fight the big corporations of America, that will almost always be a losing battle unless you have the courts or wealthy people on your side. glassonion001
No offense to anyone reading this who participated or supported it, but the Occupy Wall Street movement was a complete failure, an incoherent mess, and a disgrace to all previous social movements in the past. They had no fundamentally defined goal, they had no process to complete said imaginary goal, and they focused their energy on pointless nuances. If you read what the media has reported about that movement, and then watch videos and interviews and first person accounts of the movement, you will see two completely different pictures. Once you swim through the piles of propaganda, all you find out was there is a bunch of whiny kids who don't want to have to work for their sustenance. FreedomUnderGod001
I like that the lady in the video was truthful when explaining the theories. She told us what the assumptions are for the certain theories to work. I think that certain movements only were successful because of the time when it happened. For example during the civil rights movement the court ruling that kicked it all off was Brown vs. The Board of Education of Topeka Kansas. This ruling which sparked a revolution wouldn't have happened ten years before because there were certain judges on the Supreme Court in 1954 that swayed the decisions of the other judges in favor of integrating schools. Same with almost any revolution or social movements, it was the people, time and place that had to be right for a movement to be successful. glassonion001
I agree with what you said. It's almost like a concoction or a recipe that is needed for social change to take place. There has to be a catalyst or a spark to start a movement, what's equally important is the fuel to keep the momentum of the movement viable. People have to want it and it has to make sense and be personal for the ones it will help. Arizona001
The reason why some social movements really surpass and succeed with their intention is because if they have the right leader and if the time is right. Leader plays a big role, because your leader must have the charismatic personality and it also depends on the kind of speech that is used to pursue people. Such as Civil Rights movement, it only succeed because time demanded for it and it had right leaders such as Martin Luther King, who not only said everything equal for just african americans but equalization for each every individual. khush001
Social movement doesn’t need just a group of people with an idea but organization, leadership and resources to make an impact. A group of people with the same good ideas with the resources and leadership to survive can make a difference. It is not always the people that are deprived that join the groups it is the people that perceive their situation. People must feel like they deserve better. It takes more than just an idea to start a social movement you need the money, materials, political influence as well as social media. Our society is formed from past social movements from those who have succeeded and those who have failed very interesting. LAWS001
When the lady in the video began to give examples of social movements a recent example that popped in my head was the Baltimore riot. On the national map I saw how much of the people towards the east side were activists than any other part of America. I thought well it must be because they are closer to Washington D.C. where the President lives. I read about the mass society theory and to a point it can be understandable but, I thought really a person would do such a thing to gain a sense of importance. It is almost like what they would be striking for has no importance to him or her but, the attention they get from it. Or the want of feeling like they belong. I thought this was sad. To go to such a level that this is what people especially in the category of weak social ties and the isolated people are the likely ones to be there in the movement. I was like what are these people thinking? I feel like not just these type of people would join a social movement it can be anyone. Depending on their beliefs and all that personal stuff. All the theories really brought me to think why do people have to act that way and be that way. Why let themselves be so controlled. i understand that everyone has a reason to be in movements that they agree to be apart of. But, how can they depend so much? I feel like we do as of today as well. We have a president. We look up to him at least some of us. I know I don't. Maybe its just the way I am personally. That makes me wonder why we depend on other people or things. I'm just curious how people come to belief things, do things, and all that stuff. Like going into depth. Anyways, I think it sucks how because of the lack of money and resources a social movement fails. It's like they won't be heard unless they have money. It's all about money money money. I am getting tired of this motto. I think there has to be a change in how money is distributed because many people are struggling for no reason. Like our instructor said they don't have to be that poor. HollaGurl001
Someone may join a social movement because it has merrit, or because they feel a sense of duty to public. I personally , do not think that it has anything to do with being controlled. How many men and women join the Army , fully knowing they are probably going to be sent somewhere soon? They are not only fighting for personal reasons, but going out of a sense of loyalty to humanity. In this case for sure, sense of brotherhood is lifesaving, and they definately depend on it. I do agree that it's sad that certain movements fail due to lack of finances. I think that in this day and age there isn't any way to suceed without technological specialists. The use of internet and social networking is as important as finding finances. Technology has both benefited this , and well as played a detremintal part. Rosebudd001
I thought this topic very thought provoking. It was hard for me to really identify with any recent social movements. It is a suprising fact that a group could share a collective idea, have great organizational system, and enough financial support, and still may not be able to launch a successful movement. In our technological age, we are dependant on the need of computer networking. Rosebudd001
Social movements that center around an injustice are successful if they have the funds to keep the movement going, if they have a charismatic leader to guide them, and if they are organized in their approach to stop the injustice. There are many injustices in the world that we live in. Most of them don’t have the funds or the leader, so they don’t get off the ground no matter who believes in the social change that needs to take place. Human trafficking, the destruction of the rain forest, the worker who works a 40 hour work week and still qualifies for government assistance, all of these causes that we’ve encountered in our short semester need to be stopped and changed or fixed. Before any of that happens though, we need the money and the leader. Arizona001
I think these theories of social movement are primitive and have very small explanatory power when we apply it to real life examples. What I will introduce to your guys is the idea of 4GW. 4th Generational Warfare is the idea of decentralized groups of people all putting their efforts towards a common goal. If you want to read more about it I would suggest looking into William S. Lind, who is the leading authority on 4GW. Social movements follow a pattern more similar to this philosophy than the others. The two most obvious examples of the successful nature of these tactics are the militant groups in the middle east (i.e. Taliban, ISIS) and the GamerGate movement. (For those of you who don't spend their life on the internet, GamerGate is a movement inside of the video game industry that is pushing back against a recent push of censorship and criticism from extremist groups like the Feminazis and to reveal the blatant corruption of the journalist industry who threw away the concept of ethics and objectivity.) FreedomUnderGod001
The most important march to me was the Peoples Climate March that deals with global warming. A quarter of our population doesn't believe it is happening or thinks we have plenty of time to slow it down. However that is not the case, Antarctica temperature has risen 3 degrees Celsius since 1950, and the ice is melting 1 kilometer per year since 1992. That may not sound like much but Antarctica is one and a half time the size as the U.S. and holds 70% of our fresh water. NASA scientists say the speed of the ice melting in the last 60 years is the equivalence of the speed limit going from 55 mph to 550 mph and only getting worse. The U.S. hasn't seen any changes because we are so high above sea level. The Glaciology departments research on the rise in our oceans says Bangladesh has lost 300 yards since 2009 and 25,000 homes have been destroyed leaving them homeless. The rise in sea levels have forced their residence to flee to the capital Dhaka which gains a half a million people each year to an area that is already low income and at the poverty line. The controversy is over public opinion and Exon Mobile has spent millions in propaganda lying to people saying global warming isn't happening, isn't man made and warmer is better. It's time to panic, we are past the oh shite moment with this disaster, it is time for a revolutionary social movement. TooTall001
You should pay more attention to where you get your statistics from. As of June 26, 2014, only 40% of the population believes in Global Warming. What you are trying to cite is the fact that 78% of self-identified liberals believe in Global Warming. The ice caps aren't melting, they are actually growing. In the past 15 years we have actually experienced a decrease in global temperature (information directly from NASA) Bangladesh and those other countries around Indo-Asia have historically always had fluctuating coastlines, The urbanization of a country cannot be directly related to them fleeing the coastline just as the urbanization of the US cannot be directly related to the Midwest disappearing. Since 2009 25,000 homes have been destroyed? by what, exactly? Have you ever heard of tropical storms? Five years is a long time for storms to wreak havoc on a low-income country. Exon Mobile has a legitimate basis for fighting the propaganda that extremist activist groups try and shove down the public's throats. CO2 levels in the atmosphere were 20x higher 50,000 years ago than they are now. Are you telling me that there was a secret industrial society of human beings that we just don't know about and that killed themselves and all of their civilization off (ATLANTIS CONFIRMED). Global Warming, and it's new name "Climate Change" is anti-science, it is anti-logic, it is anti-intelligence. You are the one who is denying the obvious. I agree that it is time for a revolutionary social movement. We should throw the idiots who believe this concept as if it is a religion out of positions of power so that we can actually progress as a civilization. FreedomUnderGod001
I really like how the speaker breaks down social movement. Right off the back I was thinking of discrimination of black to fall into mass-society theory. Some people whites probably didn't see discrimination as being necessary. Because everyone else, their peers were supportive of it, they may have felt like it was necessary to follow suit. Of course the social movements for the blacks fell into the deprivation theory. In the video it says that there needs be resources such as money and political influence. For those groups who feel/ are deprived, wanting to start a movement could be difficult. Luckily for those who are in the US it's a bit easier. In the gay community, there a numerous leaders who are either celebrity or charismatic. They have access to the money, supporters, and sometimes political influence. This is a great example of the deprived theory at its best. The relative deprived theory comes into play by having some of those who are gay and have the right express it not being able to marry. Taylojj2
I think that one of the most common forms of social movement are those which follow the deprivation theory. The deprivation theory maintains that social movements happen when people feel deprived of something whether that something be pay, political rights or unhappiness with the government. Over the past 20 years, we have seen many labor unions go on strike as a way of protesting against the wages and or benefits their employers provide them with. Every February, thousands of pro-life advocates participate in the March For Life, advocating the rights of the unborn and protesting against abortion. Both these demonstrations involve crowds of people expressing their opinion in a very visible and unified way. I think you could even say that the founding of the United States followed Deprivation theory: the colonists believed that England was not preserving their rights as Englishmen and was violating their right to govern themselves. As we know, this was the dominant public opinion of many of the colonists and it resulted in political reform through revolution!
ReplyDeletethestig001
You gave a great example of the Deprivation Theory. People that are pro-life and the founding of America are two circumstances that really brought people together because they felt they were deprived of something. The colonists that came from England showed also relative deprivation because they are just disadvantaged compared to the royalty back in England, but not the most disadvantaged people ever.
Deleteswimmer001
You have explained social movement and the deprivation theory well here. I agree with you on how strikes are being made for jobs because of the wages and people being layed off too. This is natural for people to express their opinions verbally and in unification. When something does't go our way we tend to act together as one a fight for oursleves. There can be legal consequences for these acts but we are expressing our opinion of free will.
DeleteSummer001
I agree with your post and swimmers comment. I like the way you used pro-life activists and the founding of America, it made things a little more clear for me. When it comes to the pro-life activist they are usually peaceful with their protesting which, I believe helps their cause even more. I believe that when social movements are peaceful they get further in what they are hoping to accomplish. Toby001
DeleteI agree stig another movement that is soon to come is the right to bare tattoos in the military. A month ago congress passed a law stating anyone with tattoos will not be accepted into any branch of the military however the ones already there with tattoos have to stay and fulfill their time which is relative to the deprivation theory. TooTall001
DeleteSocial movements are not just a group of people with an idea. They are a group of people who have an idea, but have the resources to back up their idea. Social movements can also encourage or discourage social change. The Resource-Mobilization Theory says that there is not a chance for a social movement to happen without substantial resources. I thought it was interesting how the video said that social movements can effect people outside of them. Collective behavior, like panics, can be formed because of social movements. This kind of reminds me of rumors. If someone starts a rumor then everyone gets worried that the rumors are true.
ReplyDeleteswimemr001
*swimmer001
DeleteI disagree with the tenet of the Resource-Mobilization Theory that says you have to have substantial resources for a social change to happen. The example that I would cite would be the hippie movement and sexual revolution during the 60's 70's. I don't think that hippies really had any backers or people providing them with money, but the sheer number of people that joined in the movement and lived the lifestyle of "peace and free love" made for some large societal change. I think many people may have just jumped on the bandwagon of living that lifestyle because of peer pressure. That lifestyle definitely attracted a younger demographic of people. Secondly, even the people who didn't join in had to deal with the effects of all these people living this way who were challenging the social norms. The rest of society was forced to either accept these norms or reject them. The fruit of this movement (which didn't really have any resources or money, just a shared way of life) thus helped spark the controversies of the sexual revolution.
Deletethestig001
Swimmer: Just like rumors and gossip even when the information that is being shared might not be accurate, people believe it to be true most times more than not. This just goes to show you how powerful language is in our society. Rumors can ruin people's lives. Public opinions about people or how things are being done can make a huge change in either a negative or positive direction. You get enough people in one place; a crowd or mob people can make a gigantic impact on social change just by the size of the group. More support a particular subject or cause gets ideally the better the outcome, the more they are heard. WonderWoman001
DeleteRegarding the hippie revolution that was brought up, I don't think your example holds up under scrutiny. What you are not taking into account is how human beings are in and of themselves a resource. Additionally, the sheer number of people that joined the movement would have brought even more resources to bear for the progress of the movement. There doesn't need to be a couple of really rich backers if everyone in the movement helped out. The very act of living their hippie lifestyle was an expression of the use of their resource of free will. FreedomUnderGod001
DeleteI think you do a great job comparing social movements to rumors. In almost any rumor you must think of it to hold some value in order to pass it along. In the chapter, it discusses says rumors are unstable, difficult to stop, thrives in a climate of uncertainty. The climate of uncertainty that rumors thrive in doesn't have any reliable reasoning to be followed in my opinion. I think we're getting to a point a where we're starting to know what's a reason to stand up for certain movements. Taylojj2
DeleteI do find it interesting that more men take part in public life, leading many social movements. But nowadays they are seeing more women leading the path as well suggesting more gender equality. I believe that all of the different types of social movements could have an impact of one way or another on our society. The one that I think is so important is the political-economy theory. These movements begin when in capitalist countries' economic system fails to meet the needs of the majority of the people. For example in the U.S. society is in a crisis with people not being able to find good jobs, living below the poverty line, and living without health insurance. Social movements arise as a response to such conditions. And like the video above said whether or not positive or negative results come from the movement itself, people's message got out irregardless. WonderWoman001
ReplyDeleteI like your comment about social movements. I agree with your statement that different types of social movements could have an impact on our society especially the political economy theory. I defiantly agree that social movements arise as a response to crisis. I think it is interesting that a group of people with the same idea can come together and try for social change. I think this is an important part of our society in the United States. SVT001.
DeleteI don't think we can choose a type of social movement we would like to have or which we find more effective. All these theories are not different types of social movements but rather different ways we can observe and understand a social movement. When you say that that one is more important than another what I think you actually mean is that this particular theory lines most strongly with how you observe and understand social movements. Karma001
DeleteWonderwoman001 The fact that men lead many social movements doesn’t surprise me but I feel like with woman joining the movement there will be many more ideas that can come into play with both genders and have a big impact on our society, I can definitely agree with that. As well as the political economy theory it is one of the strongest theories that play an important role in our society. LAWS001
DeleteI think that social movements are very interesting. It takes a good leadership and a lot of dedication. Social movements also require great organization. When you think of a social movement you think of an idea that only a few posses but as time goes on more people agree with the idea. I think the most interesting part of the social movements is that the social movements become a part of the bureaucracy that they were trying to change. I think it would be a really good experience to be an active part of a social movement. Most people in society I feel like are affected by social movements, but have little to do with them. Today our social movements are not as big and profound like Martin Luther King, but I do think we still have some great things that we need to strive for in our culture. SVT001.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that social movements requires great organization. They have to be organized because they can't be insensitive to any particular group.There are not as many profound and big has movements such as one headed by Martin Luther King, cause it seems like there are not so many big problems like how it used to be earlier. khush001
DeleteI find it slightly humorous that we have sociological terms or definitions for social movements. Whenever we define something we are limiting a symbol (i.e. a spoken or written word and the like) to a certain substance, function or purpose. For example we define a chair by limiting its function to piece of furniture used for resting on. Now when we define social movements, especially those that are combatting social norms, we are in essence limiting or restricting it to a specific substance, function or purpose. The seven theories of social movements all demonstrate my point, I’m lazy so I’ll only use one example. Our textbook defines mass-society theory as the following, “People who lack social ties are mobilized into social movements. Periods of social breakdown are likely to spawn social movements. The social movement gives members a sense of belonging and social participation.” The first two sentences limit the substance of a social movement to socially isolated people. The last sentence limits a movement's purpose to serving as source of belonging. Both generalize and restrict the perception of a social movements. I think I’ll just end my thoughts here. Karma001
ReplyDeleteI believe a group of people with same certain attitudes could shape a group of society. Symbols can shape a society better then definitions do now. Social movement with from my three different groups or stages, These types of social movements depend on certain variables like, who is changed? How much has changed? These movements are common in the Modern world and are still cahnging but they can decline in the movement. Society still can get by without these movements, these movements give us a kick start. We use each other to create social movement and to share problems or issues so an action can be taken among these groups. Gender plays a role in social movement. Men tend to take more of a role in social movement. Women have played a small role in social movement including the feminist movement and the ablolitionist but men have seemed to take more of a role. Both men and women tother have played a role in social movement but men just alone have played the biggest role yet.
ReplyDeleteSummer001
I think a good point that was made in this video was how it is difficult to get social movement going if you do not have resources. I think there is some truth to the Resource Mobilization-Theory because yes the hippies in sixties probably did not have a lot of money but, they did have the resource of the media. In the sixties the hippies or free spirited people were all of the news and newspaper. Therefore, I believe that even if you do not have money to support your cause you at least need to media or else no one will hear about your struggles or resolutions to your cause. Toby001
ReplyDeleteFinances play a giant role in succes/failure of a movement, but organization is key also. The hippie movement had little social cohesion. I think there were too many competing ideas within the collective behavior of the counterculture movement. It was a free for all. They were successful in some ways, but would have progressed further with a structured set of ideals. Packers001
DeleteWhen discussing social movements and collective behavior; I am thankful for the rights, as an American, to peaceful assembly and freedom of expression. Many societies do not afford their citizens these rights. We take this for granted. Much of the social change that we Americans have witnessed are due to our constitutional rights, and would otherwise not be possible. I think of the multitude of civil riots we have seen, over the previous years, in Europe because of low economic conditions; they appear to have had little effect. One example here, the occupy wallstreet movement was big for a moment, but faded quickly without real change. Is this because of poor resource mobilization or failed collective significance? Maybe these movements were just to unpopular to succeed. Maybe only the truly necessary and relevant issues effect change like civil liberties and social equality. Packers001
ReplyDeleteIn regards to the wall street movement a few years ago, I think that the failure was due to that what they were trying to protest was such a minority view that no-one wanted to supply them. By supply them I mean a business backing them up and putting out a statement that they support them in what they are trying to do. Also they didn't have any money to do anything about what they were protesting. They were trying to fight the big corporations of America, that will almost always be a losing battle unless you have the courts or wealthy people on your side. glassonion001
DeleteNo offense to anyone reading this who participated or supported it, but the Occupy Wall Street movement was a complete failure, an incoherent mess, and a disgrace to all previous social movements in the past. They had no fundamentally defined goal, they had no process to complete said imaginary goal, and they focused their energy on pointless nuances. If you read what the media has reported about that movement, and then watch videos and interviews and first person accounts of the movement, you will see two completely different pictures. Once you swim through the piles of propaganda, all you find out was there is a bunch of whiny kids who don't want to have to work for their sustenance. FreedomUnderGod001
DeleteI like that the lady in the video was truthful when explaining the theories. She told us what the assumptions are for the certain theories to work. I think that certain movements only were successful because of the time when it happened. For example during the civil rights movement the court ruling that kicked it all off was Brown vs. The Board of Education of Topeka Kansas. This ruling which sparked a revolution wouldn't have happened ten years before because there were certain judges on the Supreme Court in 1954 that swayed the decisions of the other judges in favor of integrating schools. Same with almost any revolution or social movements, it was the people, time and place that had to be right for a movement to be successful. glassonion001
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you said. It's almost like a concoction or a recipe that is needed for social change to take place. There has to be a catalyst or a spark to start a movement, what's equally important is the fuel to keep the momentum of the movement viable. People have to want it and it has to make sense and be personal for the ones it will help. Arizona001
DeleteThe reason why some social movements really surpass and succeed with their intention is because if they have the right leader and if the time is right. Leader plays a big role, because your leader must have the charismatic personality and it also depends on the kind of speech that is used to pursue people. Such as Civil Rights movement, it only succeed because time demanded for it and it had right leaders such as Martin Luther King, who not only said everything equal for just african americans but equalization for each every individual. khush001
ReplyDeleteSocial movement doesn’t need just a group of people with an idea but organization, leadership and resources to make an impact. A group of people with the same good ideas with the resources and leadership to survive can make a difference. It is not always the people that are deprived that join the groups it is the people that perceive their situation. People must feel like they deserve better. It takes more than just an idea to start a social movement you need the money, materials, political influence as well as social media. Our society is formed from past social movements from those who have succeeded and those who have failed very interesting. LAWS001
ReplyDeleteWhen the lady in the video began to give examples of social movements a recent example that popped in my head was the Baltimore riot. On the national map I saw how much of the people towards the east side were activists than any other part of America. I thought well it must be because they are closer to Washington D.C. where the President lives. I read about the mass society theory and to a point it can be understandable but, I thought really a person would do such a thing to gain a sense of importance. It is almost like what they would be striking for has no importance to him or her but, the attention they get from it. Or the want of feeling like they belong. I thought this was sad. To go to such a level that this is what people especially in the category of weak social ties and the isolated people are the likely ones to be there in the movement. I was like what are these people thinking? I feel like not just these type of people would join a social movement it can be anyone. Depending on their beliefs and all that personal stuff. All the theories really brought me to think why do people have to act that way and be that way. Why let themselves be so controlled. i understand that everyone has a reason to be in movements that they agree to be apart of. But, how can they depend so much? I feel like we do as of today as well. We have a president. We look up to him at least some of us. I know I don't. Maybe its just the way I am personally. That makes me wonder why we depend on other people or things. I'm just curious how people come to belief things, do things, and all that stuff. Like going into depth. Anyways, I think it sucks how because of the lack of money and resources a social movement fails. It's like they won't be heard unless they have money. It's all about money money money. I am getting tired of this motto. I think there has to be a change in how money is distributed because many people are struggling for no reason. Like our instructor said they don't have to be that poor.
ReplyDeleteHollaGurl001
Someone may join a social movement because it has merrit, or because they feel a sense of duty to public. I personally , do not think that it has anything to do with being controlled. How many men and women join the Army , fully knowing they are probably going to be sent somewhere soon? They are not only fighting for personal reasons, but going out of a sense of loyalty to humanity. In this case for sure, sense of brotherhood is lifesaving, and they definately depend on it. I do agree that it's sad that certain movements fail due to lack of finances. I think that in this day and age there isn't any way to suceed without technological specialists. The use of internet and social networking is as important as finding finances. Technology has both benefited this , and well as played a detremintal part. Rosebudd001
DeleteI thought this topic very thought provoking. It was hard for me to really identify with any recent social movements. It is a suprising fact that a group could share a collective idea, have great organizational system, and enough financial support, and still may not be able to launch a successful movement. In our technological age, we are dependant on the need of computer networking. Rosebudd001
ReplyDeleteSocial movements that center around an injustice are successful if they have the funds to keep the movement going, if they have a charismatic leader to guide them, and if they are organized in their approach to stop the injustice. There are many injustices in the world that we live in. Most of them don’t have the funds or the leader, so they don’t get off the ground no matter who believes in the social change that needs to take place. Human trafficking, the destruction of the rain forest, the worker who works a 40 hour work week and still qualifies for government assistance, all of these causes that we’ve encountered in our short semester need to be stopped and changed or fixed. Before any of that happens though, we need the money and the leader. Arizona001
ReplyDeleteI think these theories of social movement are primitive and have very small explanatory power when we apply it to real life examples. What I will introduce to your guys is the idea of 4GW. 4th Generational Warfare is the idea of decentralized groups of people all putting their efforts towards a common goal. If you want to read more about it I would suggest looking into William S. Lind, who is the leading authority on 4GW. Social movements follow a pattern more similar to this philosophy than the others. The two most obvious examples of the successful nature of these tactics are the militant groups in the middle east (i.e. Taliban, ISIS) and the GamerGate movement. (For those of you who don't spend their life on the internet, GamerGate is a movement inside of the video game industry that is pushing back against a recent push of censorship and criticism from extremist groups like the Feminazis and to reveal the blatant corruption of the journalist industry who threw away the concept of ethics and objectivity.) FreedomUnderGod001
ReplyDeleteThe most important march to me was the Peoples Climate March that deals with global warming. A quarter of our population doesn't believe it is happening or thinks we have plenty of time to slow it down. However that is not the case, Antarctica temperature has risen 3 degrees Celsius since 1950, and the ice is melting 1 kilometer per year since 1992. That may not sound like much but Antarctica is one and a half time the size as the U.S. and holds 70% of our fresh water. NASA scientists say the speed of the ice melting in the last 60 years is the equivalence of the speed limit going from 55 mph to 550 mph and only getting worse. The U.S. hasn't seen any changes because we are so high above sea level. The Glaciology departments research on the rise in our oceans says Bangladesh has lost 300 yards since 2009 and 25,000 homes have been destroyed leaving them homeless. The rise in sea levels have forced their residence to flee to the capital Dhaka which gains a half a million people each year to an area that is already low income and at the poverty line. The controversy is over public opinion and Exon Mobile has spent millions in propaganda lying to people saying global warming isn't happening, isn't man made and warmer is better. It's time to panic, we are past the oh shite moment with this disaster, it is time for a revolutionary social movement. TooTall001
ReplyDeleteYou should pay more attention to where you get your statistics from. As of June 26, 2014, only 40% of the population believes in Global Warming. What you are trying to cite is the fact that 78% of self-identified liberals believe in Global Warming. The ice caps aren't melting, they are actually growing. In the past 15 years we have actually experienced a decrease in global temperature (information directly from NASA) Bangladesh and those other countries around Indo-Asia have historically always had fluctuating coastlines, The urbanization of a country cannot be directly related to them fleeing the coastline just as the urbanization of the US cannot be directly related to the Midwest disappearing. Since 2009 25,000 homes have been destroyed? by what, exactly? Have you ever heard of tropical storms? Five years is a long time for storms to wreak havoc on a low-income country. Exon Mobile has a legitimate basis for fighting the propaganda that extremist activist groups try and shove down the public's throats. CO2 levels in the atmosphere were 20x higher 50,000 years ago than they are now. Are you telling me that there was a secret industrial society of human beings that we just don't know about and that killed themselves and all of their civilization off (ATLANTIS CONFIRMED). Global Warming, and it's new name "Climate Change" is anti-science, it is anti-logic, it is anti-intelligence. You are the one who is denying the obvious. I agree that it is time for a revolutionary social movement. We should throw the idiots who believe this concept as if it is a religion out of positions of power so that we can actually progress as a civilization. FreedomUnderGod001
DeleteFor your convenience, I have found the most recent well-laid out refutation.
Deletehttps://w3.newsmax.com/LP/Finance/RWL/RWL-Dark-Winter?promo_code=zhs3nmqq
Enjoy. FreedomUnderGod001
I really like how the speaker breaks down social movement. Right off the back I was thinking of discrimination of black to fall into mass-society theory. Some people whites probably didn't see discrimination as being necessary. Because everyone else, their peers were supportive of it, they may have felt like it was necessary to follow suit. Of course the social movements for the blacks fell into the deprivation theory. In the video it says that there needs be resources such as money and political influence. For those groups who feel/ are deprived, wanting to start a movement could be difficult. Luckily for those who are in the US it's a bit easier. In the gay community, there a numerous leaders who are either celebrity or charismatic. They have access to the money, supporters, and sometimes political influence. This is a great example of the deprived theory at its best. The relative deprived theory comes into play by having some of those who are gay and have the right express it not being able to marry. Taylojj2
ReplyDelete