Social Change and Protests
July 7, 2023 10:29 AM Subscribe
Social movements ranging from Black Lives Matter to the climate movement are a fixture of political life. But what makes some social movements more successful than others? Apollo Academic Surveys surveyed 120 academic experts in Sociology, Political Science and other relevant disciplines to investigate this question.
Experts thought the most important tactical and strategic factor for a social movement’s success is “the strategic use of nonviolent disruptive tactics”, ranking it as more important than focusing on gaining media coverage and having ambitious goals. 69% of experts thought that disruptive tactics were effective for issues (like climate change) that have high public awareness and support. For issues with high awareness but low support (like anti-vaccination), only 30% thought disruptive tactics were effective. The most important governance and organizational factor for a social movement’s success was the ability to “mobilise and scale quickly in response to external events”, whereas experts thought having decentralised decision making was the least important factor. The most important internal factors that threatened social movement success were “internal conflict or movement infighting” and a “lack of clear political objectives”. 90% of experts thought that non-violent climate protests targeting the government are at least somewhat effective overall.
Also from The Guardian: Disruptive protest helps rather than hinders activists’ cause, experts say. Their “guerrilla protests” on Britain’s roads, at art galleries, museums, and cultural and sporting events have enraged the press, politicians and the public alike. But now experts have said they believe climate activists’ most important weapon could be “the strategic use of nonviolent disruptive tactics”. Nearly seven in 10 of academics surveyed rated disruptive protest tactics as “at least quite important” to success of a movement, ranking it as more important than gaining media coverage or even strictly avoiding violent tactics. The findings will boost the morale of climate activists, often derided as “eco-zealots” causing chaos for “hardworking people”. The results also contradict public opinion: polling by YouGov in February shows the vast majority (78%) of Britons think disruptive protest hinders activists’ causes.
Experts thought the most important tactical and strategic factor for a social movement’s success is “the strategic use of nonviolent disruptive tactics”, ranking it as more important than focusing on gaining media coverage and having ambitious goals. 69% of experts thought that disruptive tactics were effective for issues (like climate change) that have high public awareness and support. For issues with high awareness but low support (like anti-vaccination), only 30% thought disruptive tactics were effective. The most important governance and organizational factor for a social movement’s success was the ability to “mobilise and scale quickly in response to external events”, whereas experts thought having decentralised decision making was the least important factor. The most important internal factors that threatened social movement success were “internal conflict or movement infighting” and a “lack of clear political objectives”. 90% of experts thought that non-violent climate protests targeting the government are at least somewhat effective overall.
Also from The Guardian: Disruptive protest helps rather than hinders activists’ cause, experts say. Their “guerrilla protests” on Britain’s roads, at art galleries, museums, and cultural and sporting events have enraged the press, politicians and the public alike. But now experts have said they believe climate activists’ most important weapon could be “the strategic use of nonviolent disruptive tactics”. Nearly seven in 10 of academics surveyed rated disruptive protest tactics as “at least quite important” to success of a movement, ranking it as more important than gaining media coverage or even strictly avoiding violent tactics. The findings will boost the morale of climate activists, often derided as “eco-zealots” causing chaos for “hardworking people”. The results also contradict public opinion: polling by YouGov in February shows the vast majority (78%) of Britons think disruptive protest hinders activists’ causes.
I think these kinds of reports can be helpful for understanding the perspective of a particular cohort of analysts, and maybe I'm too grumpy and uncharitable, but I'm pretty skeptical that there are easily identifiable "experts" in determining what makes a movement "successful."
It would perhaps be helpful if there were a consensus on "successes" of social movements in history that we could know were being used as the source for the analysis. The abolition of slavery or apartheid would of course be considered successful, but what's the defined success within environmental movements? Is mass adoption of recycling considered an intermediate goal? Is a certain % change in energy sourcing a success?
Within my own experience in the animal rights area over the past two decades, there have been titanic struggles on what is considered a success for the movement, and the definition will likely continue to adapt as the movement continues. I'm not sure that a board of professors is going to be any more authoritative on what makes for successful strategies for movements, popular or otherwise.
That said: totally agree with the sentiments that the survey captures. Disruptive actions that can be tethered to concrete popular demands are a superb tool for change.
posted by Snowden at 11:04 AM on July 7, 2023 [13 favorites]
It would perhaps be helpful if there were a consensus on "successes" of social movements in history that we could know were being used as the source for the analysis. The abolition of slavery or apartheid would of course be considered successful, but what's the defined success within environmental movements? Is mass adoption of recycling considered an intermediate goal? Is a certain % change in energy sourcing a success?
Within my own experience in the animal rights area over the past two decades, there have been titanic struggles on what is considered a success for the movement, and the definition will likely continue to adapt as the movement continues. I'm not sure that a board of professors is going to be any more authoritative on what makes for successful strategies for movements, popular or otherwise.
That said: totally agree with the sentiments that the survey captures. Disruptive actions that can be tethered to concrete popular demands are a superb tool for change.
posted by Snowden at 11:04 AM on July 7, 2023 [13 favorites]
Interesting. I think this is a cool idea for a project. Curious to learn more about the people they chose to survey. We really lack objective data on social movements and I agree with above it's hard to objectively analyze movements - we don't even know what we are testing. Robust social movements always have multiple dimensions - the US Civil Rights Movement for one example, apparently strategic and disruptive non-violence, actually also included armed self defense. I really value qualitative analysis , but I do think we're super subject to bias when when we think about this stuff. I would say for example that the fascist right is having a lot of success using strategic threats of or actual violence right now, even though I wish that were not the case. I'm curious if that enters into the analysis of the surveyed experts.
posted by latkes at 12:01 PM on July 7, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by latkes at 12:01 PM on July 7, 2023 [3 favorites]
Mandatory related reading: Zeynep Tufekci's Twitter and Tear Gas: The Power and Fragility of Networked Protest
posted by MengerSponge at 12:04 PM on July 7, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by MengerSponge at 12:04 PM on July 7, 2023 [2 favorites]
this essay is basically the Saul Alinksy Justification Manifesto whereupon a better educated and informed technocratic elite enmeshed in a powerful institution provide advice to those oppressed in part by those selfsame institutions instructions on how to properly engage with them and others whereupon somehow it always comes down to nonviolence and not being too disruptive
meanwhile, the last... 50? plus years of actual organizing and strategizing is very much following the Freire method of actually listening to the people who are being oppressed regardless of that capitalist measurement of 'efficacy' because the whole fucking point is giving them a voice so you should at the very least accord, in small part, to the very values you're hoping to reify which isn't telling the oppressed what to do, how to do it, and when to do it since that's literally the hierarchical top-down power structure that most people are very much organizing against
the issues of infighting? yes, absolutely. but so much of that is, in my experience, rooted in the American culture where seeking power and status is taught and embedded from a young age. the way you combat that is to have more grace, more openness, more understanding of others and it's definitely not to resort to didactics and consultation in the way this survey and these academics are proposing
at most, this document exists for the chattering class to continue their tittering and concern trolling about tactics tactics tactics, finding all the reasons not to get involved or care because it's not fully optimized, as if organizing and creating a better world were some bike you could tune for maximum efficiency (hooray neoliberal work ethic) and not an ages long project of uniting, building community, building power, and leaving the organizing field of volunteers, providers, coaches, experts, and etc a better place for the people in your wake
posted by paimapi at 12:17 PM on July 7, 2023 [22 favorites]
meanwhile, the last... 50? plus years of actual organizing and strategizing is very much following the Freire method of actually listening to the people who are being oppressed regardless of that capitalist measurement of 'efficacy' because the whole fucking point is giving them a voice so you should at the very least accord, in small part, to the very values you're hoping to reify which isn't telling the oppressed what to do, how to do it, and when to do it since that's literally the hierarchical top-down power structure that most people are very much organizing against
the issues of infighting? yes, absolutely. but so much of that is, in my experience, rooted in the American culture where seeking power and status is taught and embedded from a young age. the way you combat that is to have more grace, more openness, more understanding of others and it's definitely not to resort to didactics and consultation in the way this survey and these academics are proposing
at most, this document exists for the chattering class to continue their tittering and concern trolling about tactics tactics tactics, finding all the reasons not to get involved or care because it's not fully optimized, as if organizing and creating a better world were some bike you could tune for maximum efficiency (hooray neoliberal work ethic) and not an ages long project of uniting, building community, building power, and leaving the organizing field of volunteers, providers, coaches, experts, and etc a better place for the people in your wake
posted by paimapi at 12:17 PM on July 7, 2023 [22 favorites]
I really like this article about how we lack objective information about labor organizing - the same themes apply for social movements.
posted by latkes at 12:20 PM on July 7, 2023 [5 favorites]
posted by latkes at 12:20 PM on July 7, 2023 [5 favorites]
Friend paimapi speaks my mind. I had a grad school instructor about 18 months back who took apart the Alinsky model in just a couple minutes of calm and measured explanation. It was pretty great.
Another way to approach the question is to look at ground level data on global nonviolent actions. I also recommend the book This Is An Uprising for ground-level perspectives on organizing in this age.
For those who haven't seen it, the essay "Building Resilient Organizations" from several months back offers some interesting perspectives on infighting. Chris Hayes had the author, Maurice Mitchell, on Hayes's podcast.
Finally, I'm gonna be That Guy and point back to a FPP that I did - my first and only so far - about the Quaker activist George Lakey, who talks about the importance of "revealing the truth" of injustice when organizing for nonviolent action. The US Civil Rights Movement was not a high-support cause among white Americans at the outset, to say the least, and yet it was incredibly effective.
posted by sockshaveholes at 12:33 PM on July 7, 2023 [19 favorites]
Another way to approach the question is to look at ground level data on global nonviolent actions. I also recommend the book This Is An Uprising for ground-level perspectives on organizing in this age.
For those who haven't seen it, the essay "Building Resilient Organizations" from several months back offers some interesting perspectives on infighting. Chris Hayes had the author, Maurice Mitchell, on Hayes's podcast.
Finally, I'm gonna be That Guy and point back to a FPP that I did - my first and only so far - about the Quaker activist George Lakey, who talks about the importance of "revealing the truth" of injustice when organizing for nonviolent action. The US Civil Rights Movement was not a high-support cause among white Americans at the outset, to say the least, and yet it was incredibly effective.
posted by sockshaveholes at 12:33 PM on July 7, 2023 [19 favorites]
I think some people above have made really excellent points about things like the question of metrics for movement success and also this seems to focus a lot on nonviolence (and there is a lot to be said about what is considered "violence" and who brings violence into certain spaces). It doesn't really seem to have asked much about what might be considered violence besides stuff like "how important is a strict avoidance of violent tactics?" and I'd be very interested in more information on the effectiveness of various tactics. Maybe I'm hypersensitive to this stuff because of personal experiences but this feels like it's coming from a "there is a right way to protest, i.e. certainly types of 'non-violent' action" perspective with which I disagree.
posted by an octopus IRL at 12:56 PM on July 7, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by an octopus IRL at 12:56 PM on July 7, 2023 [1 favorite]
historically discussions of whether political violence can be valid or effective or of what acts count as political violence go very badly on this site, like as badly as possible, like, an epic conversational disaster in which no opinions are changed, no ideas are developed, nothing is illuminated, and no one emerges unscathed. and so generally speaking this is the least bad response to anyone discussing the nature, validity, or invalidity of political violence here.
posted by bombastic lowercase pronouncements at 1:16 PM on July 7, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by bombastic lowercase pronouncements at 1:16 PM on July 7, 2023 [1 favorite]
If it doesn’t irritate a staunch institutionalist it’s not going to challenge any institutions.
posted by Artw at 1:40 PM on July 7, 2023 [10 favorites]
posted by Artw at 1:40 PM on July 7, 2023 [10 favorites]
correct.
posted by bombastic lowercase pronouncements at 1:43 PM on July 7, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by bombastic lowercase pronouncements at 1:43 PM on July 7, 2023 [1 favorite]
Having posted a bunch of things based on the premise of nonviolent action, I'll jump back in briefly and say that the question of what constitutes violence is super important - not just when stuff like kneeling at the national anthem gets tagged as some sort of violence, but also because there's plenty of evidence that actual, real, unquestioned violence is effective. Basically every story in Kim Kelly's Fight Like Hell goes, "Workers asked for better conditions, owners said no, workers burned down a factory, owners agreed to concessions." Lather, rinse, repeat.
posted by sockshaveholes at 2:00 PM on July 7, 2023 [11 favorites]
posted by sockshaveholes at 2:00 PM on July 7, 2023 [11 favorites]
One key here is that our implied notion of social movement involves some sort of outsider status. The legal system, the government, and the elites can all technically participate in and lead social movements (on the simple meaning of the words) even though that's not really what we we're talking about.
I imagine the results would be totally different if they considered both "insider" and "outsider" led social movements. What we're really asking about here is, if the power "high ground" is held by people or organizations you disagree with, how do you influence them towards better positions? Survey results on the topic are interesting but given the complexity and variety of various social problems and solutions, still best to use judgment in individual situations to determine your course of action.
Side note: Kate Bronfenbrenner's research, mentioned in Latkes' article above, addresses effectiveness of union election tactics for both outsider unions and insider employers. She's currently researching an updated sequel article.
posted by Hume at 2:42 PM on July 7, 2023
I imagine the results would be totally different if they considered both "insider" and "outsider" led social movements. What we're really asking about here is, if the power "high ground" is held by people or organizations you disagree with, how do you influence them towards better positions? Survey results on the topic are interesting but given the complexity and variety of various social problems and solutions, still best to use judgment in individual situations to determine your course of action.
Side note: Kate Bronfenbrenner's research, mentioned in Latkes' article above, addresses effectiveness of union election tactics for both outsider unions and insider employers. She's currently researching an updated sequel article.
posted by Hume at 2:42 PM on July 7, 2023
I think there's a big difference between a) burning down your own factory, b) burning down the property of someone who's a clear threat, and c) burning down the corner store where everyone shops. So anything like this is just either uselessly broad or too specific to one sort of injustice/movement to pertain to the others.
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 3:19 PM on July 7, 2023
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 3:19 PM on July 7, 2023
When encountering “social proof” in relation to the anti-mask protests, I incorrectly took it to mean something like putting in your time on the line and taking your (unjust) lumps from a reactionary establishment to eventually demonstrate to the mushed middling masses the inherent moral superiority of your position.
It doesn’t mean any of that but I like that definition better.
posted by Heywood Mogroot III at 3:31 PM on July 7, 2023
It doesn’t mean any of that but I like that definition better.
posted by Heywood Mogroot III at 3:31 PM on July 7, 2023
I wrote my dissertation on this subject. The statistical results showing that nonviolent maximalist campaigns are more effective than violent ones isn’t terribly robust. My work “solved” the problem of comparing goals (looking at a specific context) and I think I put a pretty convincing argument forward that violence (in this context) was way more effective that nonviolence. I’d say more but would dox myself. Anyway a number of people told me that this kind of argument was going to piss a lot of people off. Now I’m out of academia.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 5:01 PM on July 7, 2023 [19 favorites]
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 5:01 PM on July 7, 2023 [19 favorites]
I just want to say: "we surveyed 120 academic experts" is an outstanding methodology I would love to see more of!
posted by SaltySalticid at 6:56 PM on July 7, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by SaltySalticid at 6:56 PM on July 7, 2023 [2 favorites]
OK, this is a bit of a drive-by, but the scholars currently working on social movements in the social sciences mainly revolve around three people, who trained a lot of them:
Charles Tilly
Sidney Tarrow
Doug McAdam
Chuck is dead and certainly wasn't surveyed here; Sid is old; Doug got interviewed first, probably. But the point of my posting is that, Jesus, if you think sociologists, political scientists, and historians aren't studying social movements, what exactly do you think we do? Don't you get that social movements are one of the most incredibly interesting intersections between society and politics? There's a ton of work on this, and it's yours to discover, but it doesn't fit in a Metafilter post.
Listen: people have been caring responsibly about this for decades and decades, and producing incredible work that (I think) roughly aligns with this poll of contemporary experts.
Explore.
posted by Scarf Joint at 9:14 PM on July 8, 2023
Charles Tilly
Sidney Tarrow
Doug McAdam
Chuck is dead and certainly wasn't surveyed here; Sid is old; Doug got interviewed first, probably. But the point of my posting is that, Jesus, if you think sociologists, political scientists, and historians aren't studying social movements, what exactly do you think we do? Don't you get that social movements are one of the most incredibly interesting intersections between society and politics? There's a ton of work on this, and it's yours to discover, but it doesn't fit in a Metafilter post.
Listen: people have been caring responsibly about this for decades and decades, and producing incredible work that (I think) roughly aligns with this poll of contemporary experts.
Explore.
posted by Scarf Joint at 9:14 PM on July 8, 2023
Google "social movements syllabus" to discover a thousand more links to the scholarship on social movements. It's important, it's deep, and it's kind of one of the main reasons for sociology, political science, and history.
We didn't forget to think about this.
posted by Scarf Joint at 9:37 PM on July 8, 2023 [2 favorites]
We didn't forget to think about this.
posted by Scarf Joint at 9:37 PM on July 8, 2023 [2 favorites]
?? Curious why you got the vibe that people think no one is studying this! I'm very interested in the work going on around this! I'm just speaking of the inherent biases (which every field contains) and the challenges of qualitative research, as valuable as it is (and quantitative research also has a lot of limitations!)
I would always love to read more about the work going on in this space and I read a lot about it for someone with no academic background so would always welcome specific recommendations from folks grounded in this work.
posted by latkes at 12:40 PM on July 9, 2023
I would always love to read more about the work going on in this space and I read a lot about it for someone with no academic background so would always welcome specific recommendations from folks grounded in this work.
posted by latkes at 12:40 PM on July 9, 2023
doesn't fit in a Metafilter post...roughly aligns with this poll of contemporary experts.
Is it uncharitable to call bullshit? Or at least elaborate so you don't undermine your own points.
posted by Reasonably Everything Happens at 8:22 PM on July 9, 2023 [1 favorite]
Is it uncharitable to call bullshit? Or at least elaborate so you don't undermine your own points.
posted by Reasonably Everything Happens at 8:22 PM on July 9, 2023 [1 favorite]
« Older Straight men do not deserve nice hair. | A Low-Budget Remake of His Vile Career Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Jon_Evil at 10:57 AM on July 7, 2023