The New Social Movement
A Shift From Marxism Social Movement Theory
New Social Theory
With its history dating back to the 1960s, New Social Movement Theory (NSM) is a theory that attempts to give causality and reason for the existence of social movements in a post-industrial economy. This deviation from the previous methods of social movements offers up an opportunity for significant discussion and debate.
Background
If we go back to the pre-historic days of social movement theory, there only remains one theory that, while critiqued often, is still cited in the discussions. This theory is that of a Marxist explanation to the societal and cultural reason of working-class resistance that had been of significant concern in the Union of Society Socialists Republics or U.S.S.R.
It was Karl Marx who found himself writing swaths of publications, and developed a new view of social movement behavior. He argued that the concept of capitalism is what forms a social movement. Marxist theorists find themselves wanting to fight capitalism and bring a government that is built in a socialistic matter of government. A Marxist point of view come from an approach where the prevalence of economic flaws, social class relations, and crises in the prediction or explanation of a collective identity comprised of multiple individual social actors (Cohen, 1983).
Marxism, which was rooted in vergesellshaftung (societalization) and fetishism, are derived from distrust in modern political, economic ideology versus the societal struggles. “Marx assumed that something very much like the liberal ideal of a society free of power and class conflict could be attained by a socialist mode of production” (Cohen, 1983, p. 104)
It was the response to the various movements that had started to conjure into existence around the globe that the social sciences deemed it appropriate to review popular literature and research on the topic of social movements, but to start explaining this wave of global movement. The concept of “revolt against modernity” is a phrase used by many theorists in conjointly explaining that “Post — industrial” and the cultural model of new movements is defined by an anti-productivities model.
With his groundbreaking study of the peasant revolution in the 1700s, Charles Tilly’s The Vendee pushed its way onto the mainstream as one of the original studies in the social movement theory. Tilly’s work is quite accomplished when it comes to getting Social Movement Theories to start philosophizing the meaning of social movement behavior. Tilly’s work also brought such titles like the recent publication of Social Movements, 1786–2012, in which Tilly and Lesley Wood provide a rich historical glance at social movements but identify social movements as a bioproduct of the democratization process (Tilly & Wood, 2012).
It was not until 1951 when David Truman released The Governmental Process that argued that the concept of collective identities as a tool in a democratic society that is available on a global population.
The main difference between the New Social Movement and Marxism Theory was the identification of core causality for the resurgence in movements. Previously, those who followed the Marxist interpretation of society do not account for the wave of capitalism that would engulf the globe after World War II. Marxist theories of society assumed the continuation of a large working class in post-industrial society.
Touraine’s Critical Invitation
Alain Touraine is considered to be one of the major social movement theorists. Along with key individuals like Jurgen Habermas and Alberto Melucci, Touraine offers his ideas in a vast collection of research and books. While there are numerous articles and books the supported the foundation for the New Social Movements. Touraine is to this day considered to be the most influential social theorist on the discussion of social movements when his work first started in the late 1970s. It is suggested that Alain attempted to change the global view of social movements and invite the movements to the center stage of social studies in his publication of The Self-Production of Society.
In his breakout publication of The Self-Production of Society (Touraine, 1977), Alain first attempts to “replace the concept of ‘historical action systems’ that act permanently against attempts to produce social order” (Eder, 2015, p. 33). This is in line with Touraine’s theme throughout the book, which is that society is a permanent product of collective action.
Touraine outlines three historical factors as a theorized explanation of societal changes. These are the need for a collective actor, that can construct and an identity that includes the cultivation of a common enemy, while maintaining what Touraine defines as a totality meaning historicity dominates societal function and class relations (Touraine, 1977, p. 6).
Touraine’s ‘Historicity’ and its Components
Touraine captures the idea of consequences in the wake of identifying social movements as a historical reproduction, or historical actuality. Touraine breaks this concept down into three components: Knowledge, Accumulation, and Cultural Model.
Knowledge
The model of Knowledge is related to the field of science, in that it is not a produced good, but provides societies with alternative thoughts or research. Touraine identifies this as the most important but plays a minimal role in its application on societal analysis. It is considered the most important because Touraine argues that without knowledge, humanity would be incapable of imagining social relations and anti-social relations. (Touraine, 1977, pp. 17–18)
Accumulation
Briefly addressed and defined only by one paragraph, Touraine explains to the reader that the “separation between the two orders of phenomena lumped together under the name of work is not conceivable without a recognition of the economic forms of historicity. The existence of work on work presupposes a process of accumulation.” (Touraine, 1977, p. 18).
Cultural Model
While not a novel term, Touraine provides his definition of the cultural model. Touraine defines this model by recognizing that society is not defined by its key figures and powers, but rather by that of relations between organizational capabilities, and the ability to fulfill and act on such capabilities. Touraine ties it to historicity by carefully introducing the phrase cultural model as a confined definition within a system where society reflects on itself by the method of learning one’s capabilities and ability to act on those capabilities. Touraine emphasizes the importance of treating the cultural model as a type of society, not a group, or collective in particular.
The Voice and the Eye
It was his original work The Voice and the Eye: On the Relationship Between Actors and Analysists (Touraine, 1980) addressed the theoretical impact that the social movement observers objectivity, and solution to this methodological issue. As an intervention to this methodological issue, Touraine provides the idea of “sociological intervention” and its abilities to identify social movements capable of reflecting on their collective action. Touraine offered a new perspective which started preparing for the introduction of new social movements.
The concept of society acting as a permanent outcome from within the collective action. Touraine provides an explanation for this social change has been based on 3 factors. The 1st factor is the concept of collective actor which is an individual. Secondly Touraine identifies that there has to be a shared enemy for collective actors to act and lastly totality of historical processes in which action is implanted (della Porta & Diani, The Oxford Handbook of Social Movements, 2015).
Identity Theory
New social movements are very distinct in their ideologies and goals. These differences are characteristically different from social movements prior. No concept as much as identity theory hasn’t ties to new social movements on a multidisciplinary research topic. Sociologists and other scholars find himself defining collective identity as a response to a lack of dominant resource mobilization. Collective identity is used to describe fictional as well as actual community in which the “act of perception and construction as well as the discovery of pre-existing bonds, interests, and boundaries. It is a fluid and relational, emerging out of interactions with a number of different audiences… rather than fixed.” (Polletta & Jasper, 2001, p. 298)
Critique of the New Social Movement Paradigm
In a brief and matter of fact critical analysis of the theories brought out from New Social Movement, author Nelson Pichardo (1997) offers an at times rigorous love analysis of the paradigm in New Social Movements: A Critical Review…
In the article Rethinking Social Movements, Jean Cohen provides a compelling reason to reevaluate and reflect on current theories of social movements. Cohen provides a short background on the movement from Marxist social theory and into the modern worker’s movement and new social movements. Cohen starts by identifying the structural inadequacies in the Marxist theory and how the post-Marxist theorists, who disagree between each other, agree that Marxist views of social movement and the theoretical framework presupposed by new social movements do no better.
Cohen further goes on to argue that the “tells” of movements is not simply a defense mechanism (formal and informal or autonomous) but act instead as democratic potentiometers resulting in change in a legislative level all the way to small-scale change. While Cohen takes the strict approach towards critiquing social movements like the Marxist and new social movements, they also act as a “sympathetic theorist and politically conscious participant” (Cohen, 1983, p. 111).
