A

Theories of Social Movements

Overview: Why Social Movements Happen

  • Theories mentioned include Classical/Contemporary perspectives and four major frameworks developed by social scientists.

  • Social movements can be sparked by social networks and triggering events: religious institutions, schools, media, online groups, and events such as Rosa Parks or George Floyd. These factors can initiate collective action and mobilization.

Historical Context and Time Frames

  • Classical Theory (1930s–1960s)

    • Focus on Relative Deprivation

    • Emphasizes frustration, deprivation, and social injustice

    • Examples: Urban riots and labor unrest

  • Relative Deprivation (addressed as a core concept across theories)

  • Resource Mobilization Theory (1960s–1970s)

    • Movements require resources: money, networks, leadership

    • Emphasizes structure, planning, organization, and strategy

    • Examples: Civil Rights Movement’s use of churches, schools, and funding

  • Political Process Theory (1980s–1990s)

    • Success depends on political opportunities

    • Emergence of sympathizers at local and federal levels; openness of political system

    • Examples: Women’s suffrage and LGBTQ rights movements

  • New Social Movement Theory (1990s–present)

    • Shifts focus to identity, culture, norms, values

    • Movements centered on rights and acceptance rather than purely economic issues

    • Examples: LGBTQ rights, environmentalism, Black Lives Matter

Major Theories of Social Movements

Relative Deprivation Theory

  • Core idea: Movements arise when people feel a gap or deprivation of something they believe they deserve (resources, rights, opportunities, social justice). The gap is called relative deprivation.

  • Example: Civil Rights Movement (response to racial and systemic inequality)

  • Subpoints:

    • African Americans and other marginalized groups faced discrimination despite legal freedom; perceived gap between rights and lived reality spurred mobilization.

    • Gay communities join movements like same-sex marriage to obtain legal recognition equal to heterosexual marriages.

The Concept of Relative Deprivation (Origins and Mechanism)

  • Attributed to American sociologist Robert K. Merton (noted for WWII-era soldier study).

  • Finding: Soldiers in the Military Police were less satisfied with promotion opportunities than regular GIs, illustrating relative deprivation rather than absolute deprivation.

  • Key idea: Deprivation is relative; individuals compare themselves to others rather than relying on absolute standards.

Critiques of Relative Deprivation Theory

  • Deprivation is widespread, but movements do not always emerge.

    • Many poor or marginalized communities feel deprived for decades without sustained movements.

  • Theory does not explain participation by people who do not directly benefit (e.g., wealthy individuals protesting policies that perpetuate poverty or inequality).

  • Assumes deprivation automatically leads to mobilization; ignores ideology, leadership, and other factors.

  • It is often vague and struggles to explain why some grievances escalate into movements while others do not.

Resource Mobilization Theory (RMT)

  • Core idea: Movement success depends on the ability to acquire and mobilize resources.

  • Key proponents: McCarthy and Zald (1977).

  • Central claim: People participate when a movement has access to key resources.

  • Resources types:

    • Material: money, supplies, physical space

    • Human: volunteers, leaders, members

    • Organizational: staff, offices, formal structures

    • Cultural: narratives, knowledge, symbols

    • Moral: endorsements, solidarity, loyalty

  • Practice implications:

    • Success requires effective organization and management of resources (money, labor, media, capacity).

    • Resources can come from allies (NGOs, political parties, other organizations) or through internal fundraising.

    • Social networks help spread ideas, organize protests, and gain media coverage.

  • Growth and institutionalization:

    • Movements may become more structured as they expand, with paid staff, offices, and formal leadership to sustain activity.

  • Examples:

    • Women’s Suffrage Movements: strength through organizational capacity (e.g., National American Woman Suffrage Association) and alliances with political/social institutions.

    • National Organization for Women (NOW): growth in resources led to greater media coverage.

  • International collaboration:

    • Exchange of strategies and mobilization of resources across borders (e.g., International Woman Suffrage Alliance, 1904).

  • Case study: Women’s Movement

    • Organized leadership, funding, and cross-border alliances amplified impact.

  • Modern example: Women’s March (2017)

    • Success attributed to organized leadership, strong social media presence, and financial support enabling large-scale protests in many cities globally.

    • The name and framing drew on parallels with the 1963 Civil Rights era protest in Washington, D.C. (MLK’s I Have a Dream speech).

    • Triggered by Trump-era politics; occurred on January 21, 2017, the day after the inauguration.

  • Triggers and scale:

    • Growth from a Facebook post to thousands of supporting organizations and hundreds of thousands of participants.

    • 2016: >100 organizations announced support online; 2017: ~400 organizations joined; Washington, D.C. march attracted ~500,000 attendees (organizers’ estimate; 200,000 expected).

  • Supporting organizations involved (examples): Amnesty International USA, Mothers of the Movement, National Center for Lesbian Rights, National Organization for Women, MoveOn.org, Human Rights Watch, NAACP.

  • Visual and organizational outputs:

    • Official posters and grassroots organizing materials; momentum extended to 2018 and subsequent years globally (2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2023, 2024).

  • Later developments (2025):

    • The Women’s March rebranded to the People’s March and held protests around the U.S. and abroad near the time of the second Trump inauguration.

Critique of Resource Mobilization Theory

  • While influential, RMT is not sufficient to explain all aspects of social movements.

  • Critics argue that factors beyond organizational resources (e.g., deprivation experiences, ideology, leadership) play crucial roles in mobilization and action.

Political Process Theory (PPT) / Political Opportunity Theory

  • Origin and focus: Developed in the late 1970s and 1980s; emphasizes interaction between movements and political environments.

  • Core idea: Movements emerge and succeed when political systems present opportunities (vulnerability, openings) that activists can exploit.

  • Key features:

    • Political opportunities (weak repression, openness, elite divisions)

    • Mobilizing structures (social networks, online platforms)

    • Political alignments and supportive institutions at local and federal levels

  • Examples:

    • Arab Spring (2010–2012): Protests across the Middle East driven by political repression, corruption, unemployment, and social media influence; political openings aided momentum.

    • Civil Rights Movement (1960s): Federal government support and divisions among Southern elites created opportunities for movement advancement.

  • Criticisms of PPT:

    • Concepts like political opportunity can be vague or unclear, reducing predictive power and making the theory descriptive.

    • In highly repressive regimes, favorable political conditions may be limited, forcing movements to rely on covert networks, culture, or transnational support.

    • The theory sometimes downplays the role of culture, values, and identities in shaping mobilization.

  • Elaborations on elite dynamics:

    • Elite split or disunity refers to fragmentation among powerful establishment groups.

    • Elites may seek alliances with other interest groups to secure majorities and maintain control.

  • Cultural factors:

    • Critics argue that culture, symbols, and narratives can be as or more influential than political opportunity in motivating action.

New Social Movement Theory (NSMT)

  • Core idea: Contemporary movements differ from older, economy-focused movements; they operate across borders and center on identity, culture, norms, and rights rather than strictly economic issues.

  • Examples of NSMTs: Environmentalism (climate justice), LGBTQ+ rights, peace movements, race/gender advocacy; Black Lives Matter cited as a modern example.

  • Key characteristics:

    • Focus on post-materialist values (e.g., environmental protection, human rights)

    • Decentralized structure with informal leadership and broad grassroots participation

    • Middle-class base rather than exclusively working-class; transnational reach

  • Emphasis: Cultural change and post-materialist values become primary drivers for mobilization.

  • Structure and leadership:

    • Decentralized and horizontal leadership; emphasis on participation and inclusivity.

  • Critiques of NSMT:

    • Perceived as vague due to abstract terms like identity and values.

    • Western bias: Many NSMT claims are rooted in Western, post-industrial societies and may not map well onto movements in other regions.

    • May underemphasize material conditions like poverty or inequality and downplay traditional labor oppression.

    • Lack of clear, dominant leadership can hinder organizational cohesion.

  • Visual overview (NSMT features):

    • Post-materialist values, cultural identity, middle-class base, decentralized leadership, and a focus on rights, environmentalism, and social norms.

Integrated Theoretical Framework for Social Movements

  • A composite view often used in textbooks combines several elements:

    • Grievances and Relative Deprivation: perceived gaps between expected and achieved outcomes

    • Ideology and Awareness: beliefs, frames, and political consciousness

    • Triggering Events: catalysts that spark action (e.g., high-profile cases, policy shifts)

    • Resource Mobilization: availability of material, human, organizational, cultural, and moral resources

    • Social Networks: ties through religious institutions, schools, media, and online platforms

    • Political Opportunity: openings in the political system that permit mobilization and success

  • These components interact to produce mobilization and collective action

Readings and Case Studies: Key Works and Findings

Alison Dahl Crossley: Facebook Feminism and New Technologies

  • Crossley argues that Facebook became a platform for feminist activism in the United States by enabling mobilization and recruitment.

  • Key findings:

    • Facebook provides a unique infrastructure for mobilization due to large, diverse friendship networks used to spread feminism and raise feminist consciousness.

    • The digital platform itself, aided by advances in technology, rapidly facilitates communication patterns and information flow, making Facebook a preeminent tool for 21st-century social justice activism.

    • Internet-enabled mobilization promotes emotional solidarity, allowing participants to express pride and enthusiasm in feminist beliefs and values.

    • Facebook and feminist blogs are integral to both online and offline organizing in evolving social movements.

Other Readings: Foundational Theories and Overview

  • Anindya Sen’s synthesis (posted on BS): Examines why social movements arise and grow through a review of deprivation theory, resource mobilization theory, political process theory, and new social movement theories.

  • The study highlights how multiple theories can illuminate different aspects of mobilization and why movements vary in form, scope, and success.

Case Studies: Women’s Movement and Global Activism

Women’s Suffrage Movements

  • Success attributed to:

    • Strong, organized associations (e.g., National American Woman Suffrage Association)

    • Skilled leadership and strategic alliances with political and social institutions

    • Growth of organizations like NOW increased resources and media visibility

International Collaboration in Suffrage

  • Global networks exchanged strategies and mobilized resources across borders.

  • International Woman Suffrage Alliance (1904) coordinated advocacy and shared tactics.

The Women’s March (2017) as a Case Study

  • Why it succeeded:

    • Organized leadership, robust social media presence, and broad financial backing enabled large-scale protests in multiple cities globally.

  • Timeline and framing:

    • Triggered by policy positions and rhetoric perceived as discriminatory toward women, immigration, healthcare, and LGBTQ rights.

    • Took place on January 21, 2017, the day after the inauguration of Donald Trump.

  • Scale and outreach:

    • Rapid escalation from online mobilization to a mass movement with participation across the United States and abroad.

  • Aftermath and continuity:

    • The 2017 march inspired a second march in 2018 and continued demonstrations in subsequent years (2019–2024).

The 2017–2025 Evolution

  • The movement’s identity and branding evolved; in 2025, the Women’s March rebranded as the People’s March and organized protests around the United States and abroad around the time of the second Trump inauguration.

  • The role of social media:

    • Social networks and online platforms were central to mobilization and sustaining momentum over time.

    • The movement emphasized intersectionality, recognizing how race, gender, sexuality, and class intersect and reinforce systems of oppression.

Summaries of Key Critiques Across Theories

  • Relative Deprivation Theory:

    • Overemphasizes deprivation as the primary driver; not all deprived individuals mobilize; fails to account for other motivating factors like ideology and leadership; can be vague in predicting outcomes.

  • Resource Mobilization Theory:

    • Powerful in explaining organizational dynamics and the importance of resources, but insufficient to explain why movements arise in the first place or why deprivation-sensitive grievances translate into action.

  • Political Process Theory:

    • Highlights the role of political openings but can be vague about what constitutes a genuine opportunity; may underplay cultural, symbolic, and transnational factors; in some regimes, opportunities are scarce or ill-defined.

  • New Social Movement Theory:

    • Emphasizes identity and culture but can neglect material conditions and economic inequality; potential Western bias; struggles with leadership clarity and operational mechanisms.

Final Takeaways

  • Social movements arise from a combination of grievances, resources, political opportunities, networks, and triggering events.

  • Different theories illuminate different facets of mobilization: deprivation and injustice (why people feel compelled), resources and organization (how movements operate), political contexts (when they succeed), and identities/culture (why movements persist and achieve lasting change).

  • Contemporary movements often blend these elements, with new technologies (social media) amplifying messaging, coordination, and cross-border collaboration, as seen in the Women’s March and related campaigns.