Political Protest and Social Movements
Social Movements and Collective Action/Collective Identities
Social movements are crucial for understanding political formations, such as identity politics.
They represent groups' autonomy and self-determination.
They offer mechanisms for collective action.
Social movements highlight political action within civil society or the private sphere, alongside action in the state or the public sphere.
Social movements evolved from liberation and socialist movements, which framed politics along Marxist and nationalist lines.
Early movements emphasized economism, characterizing all social movements as based on working-class politics, often excluding other political forces or identities.
New social movements (single-issue interest groups or protest groups) focus on identity politics like gender, sexuality, feminism, culture, ecology, and immigration.
They are based on the idea that the structures of domination overlap class identity.
These movements recognize a multiplication of spheres of social antagonism or socio-political struggle.
While they may seem to displace the working class as the primary subject for progressive politics, new social movements still align with the progressive socialist politics of early movements.
The diversity of social movements should not be oversimplified.
Colonialism, Liberation Movements, Popular Uprising
Social movements or interest groups are often seen as emerging from liberation struggles in the 1950s and 1960s.
They are viewed as effects of capitalism's impact (industrialization and urbanization) and colonization.
Branch's reading traces the emergence of social movements in the dialectical struggle against the colonial state and demands for urban space transformation.
The history of anti-colonialism or decolonization involved various political forces.
Branch's reading highlights that Marxism and nationalism were not the only driving forces for revolution; protests against colonial structure features were also significant.
These struggles included worker-led, peasant-led, women-led, and youth-led movements.
Branch and Mapily suggest that "popular movements took decidedly different contours."
Although these struggles targeted the state, they paved the way for new social movements or interest groups defined by their relationship to the state.
New Social Movements, Interest Groups
New social movements largely demand the expansion of the democratic process by the state.
Heywood argues that liberation movements cannot be identified as social movements because they sought to restructure or destroy the state.
Interest groups seek to work with the state, either within or outside, and have a relationship with the government.
Types of (Interest) Groups and Their Characteristics
The nature of the relationship between new social movements and formal structures of representation, or between interest groups and government, is complex.
Interest groups take on different identities, making them difficult to classify.
1. Communal Groups
Membership is based on birth.
They include families, tribes, castes, and ethnic groups.
They share heritage, traditional bonds, and loyalties.
They can give rise to ethnic nationalism.
2. Institutional Groups
They exist within government, such as bureaucracies, the military, and the police.
They lack autonomy or independence from the state.
3. Associational Groups
They are formed based on shared goals.
Their roles may include administering government programs, serving on public bodies, or organizing campaigns of civil disobedience.
Sectional groups: trade unions, business corporations, professional bodies (SAICA, Legal Practice Council, etc.). They represent workers, employers, consumers, or ethnic/religious groups.
Promotional groups (NGOs): cause or attitude groups. Examples include pro-choice and pro-life abortion groups, environmental and animal rights groups.
Insider groups: they have institutionalized access to government. They may include business groups and trade unions.
Outsider groups: they lack formal access to government and are often characterized as radical protest groups.
The characteristics of these groups depend on the political system in which they operate.
Models of Group Politics
These models are linked to theories of the state.
Models are also determined by the political system, including party systems, institutional arrangements, political processes, and the distribution of power.
1. Pluralist Model
Based on the assumption that politics is fragmented and widely spread across society.
The political system must promote bargaining processes.
Various interest groups act as the link between government and the governed.
Unequal competition between groups can occur, where well-funded organizations may have more access to government.
The pluralist model contrasts with monism, which centralizes state power (as in a single-party system like China).
2. Corporatist Model
Associated with the idea of the developmental state.
The state actively participates in economic management.
It may lead to state capture by large interest groups.
There are closer links between the state, business, and labor (tripartism). They are actively involved in policy formulation and implementation (e.g., NEDLAC).
Corporatism is a strategy used by the state to seek buy-in from business and labor on policies.
3. New Right Model
Founded on the idea of individualism and the free market system.
Individuals join interest groups for self-interest.
The types and models of interest groups are influenced by political culture, the institutional structure (centralized or decentralized), the nature of the party system, and the nature and style of public policy.