Politics and Social Movements

Social Movements and Criminality

“To make progress, individual
originality must be able to
express itself. In order that
the originality of the idealist
whose dreams transcend this
century may find expression it
is necessary that the
originality of the criminal, who
is below the level of his time,
shall also be possible. One
does not occur without the
Rosa Parks, 1955 other”
--Emile Durkheim
“In general, we understand by ‘power’ the
chance of a man or of a number of men to
realize their own will in a communal action
even against the resistance of others who
are participating in the reaction”
(from “Class, Status, and Party,” p. 180 in G&M).
Power is not necessarily “legitimate”

• Only in the extreme case of slavery there is no free compliance.

(“Power”)
“Legitimate authority”

 He defined authority simply as a matter of

people’s belief about its rightfulness, regardless of
where that belief came from and whether or not it
is morally justified.

 Weber’s approach treats authority as a form of

power; authority is ‘legitimate power’, power
cloaked in legitimacy

 “treated as ‘valid’” (Theory of Social & Economic

Organization, p. 152).
The Leaders!
What do they have in common?

• They (Sun Yat-sen, a professor or a scientists, a Queen or King, slave

traders) are leaders in the sense that they issue commands and
others follow their commands.
Three types of legitimate authority

Based on their validity:

1. Charismatic
2. Traditional
3. Legal-Rational
 1. Charismatic Authority

• “a certain quality of individual

personality by virtue of which he is
considered extraordinary and treated
as endowed with supernatural,
superhuman, or at least specifically
exceptional powers or qualities.
These are such as are not accessible
to the ordinary person, but are
Max Weber 1869-1920 regarded as of divine origin or as
exemplary, and on the basis of them
the individual concerned is treated as
a ‘leader’” (Weber, 1922a: 241)
Charisma, in short:
1. It’s a relationship

2. It’s a style of leadership, and therefor

a relationship of power

3. Based on a perception that the leader

is extraordinary (“spezfisch
außertäglich,” or, ‘outside the
everyday’—Weber 1976: 140)

4. Extraordinariness can take different forms (supernatural powers,

genius, extraordinary wisdom, cunning in battle, etc.)

5. It is a revolutionary force, challenging conventional social

structures or beliefs
1. Traditional Authority
• For example the Queen is the supreme authority in both England and
Canada

• 
Traditional grounds

“belief in the sanctity of traditions” is the basis of the legitimacy of

traditional authority.
Napoleon—a subtle difference
2. Legal-Rational Authority

• For example: the authority of the Prime Minister in Canada or of the

professors at the university.
• “They are elected or appointed on the basis of the legally
established rules.”
The Basis of legitimacy : Rationality

• enacted through rational discussion and deliberation and thus

subject to change
• Consistent and logical (not contradictory and conflicting laws)
The rules:

• a consistent system of law

rationally enacted

• Constitution  laws (parliament

 government, et.)
The ruler:

• Is subject to an impersonal order (the rule of law where the ruler is

not beyond the law)
The Rule of Law

• “in free countries the law

ought to be king; and there
ought to be no other.” –
Thomas Paine
The ruler/ruler relationship:
The ruled and ruler are both members of the
group and have equal status
(Citizens and not “subjects”, “disciples” or
“followers”.)

•owe the obedience not to the person in

authority as an individual, but to the
impersonal order.
An example: Parents

Most often regarded as a … :

 An example: Parents

Most often regarded as a TRADITIONAL form:

• They rely on the traditional idea of parental authority

“Children, obey your parents in the

Lord, for this is right.”
Ephesians 6:1
“Legal-rational” model of parenting:

• parents negotiate the rules with children and let the rules and not
merely the parental authority govern parent-child relationship
“Charismatic” parenting model

Parents as “heroes” or parents as “best friends”

SOCIAL MOVEMENT THEORY:
 Relative Deprivation:
The classic perspective,
‘relative deprivation theory,’ assumes that grievances
are the fundamental cause of social movements
 RELATIVE DEPRIVATION:
A felt discrepancy between aspirations and opportunities,
both of which people believe to be legitimate and feasible

Can be:
“aspirational” (expectations increase), or,

“decremental” (expectations remain the same but conditions

depreciate)
Problems with relative deprivation?
• Grievances are ubiquitous (everyone is always upset!)
• Grievances are ubiquitous (everyone is always upset about
something!)
Problems with relative deprivation?
• Grievances are ubiquitous (everyone is always upset!)
• Grievances are ubiquitous (everyone is always upset!)
• Grievances are ubiquitous (everyone is always upset about
something!)
Problems with relative deprivation?

•Grievances are ubiquitous (everyone is

always upset!)

•“Resource mobilization” scholars would say

that resources and the ability of
organizations (“social movement
organizations”) to attract resources is the
most important factor for transforming
grievances into a successful social movement
action
 Framing, according to Benford and Snow
2000
A grievance needs to be present

• Then, these ways of framing it are created:

1) Diagnostic framing—defines the problem and the guilty agents

2) Prognostic framing—proposes solutions to the problem

3) Motivational framing—provides “vocabularies of motive” that

persuade people to join
“Repertoires” (Charles Tilly)

Repertoires are:
“limited set[s] of routines that are learned,
shared, and acted out through a relatively
deliberate process of choice. Repertoires are
learned cultural creations…. At any particular
point in history, however, they learn only a
rather small number of alternative ways to act
collectively” (Tilly 1993: 264).

-they evolve like any other form of culture.

 The ‘Hidden
Transcript’
(Scott 1990)
James C. Scott

- speeches, gestures, and practices that contradict the

status quo ‘public transcripts’ promulgated by elite,
powerful, opinion leaders.

- Typically produced by the powerless, marginalized,

‘subaltern’ sectors of society—those who most naturally
have grievances against the governing order.

- They are ‘hidden’ precisely because they “characterize

discourse that takes place ‘offstage,’ beyond direct
observation by powerholders…. produced for a
different audience and under different constraints of
power than the public transcript” (Scott 1990: 4-5)
Social movements can erupt when there are
what Scott called: “public declarations of the
hidden transcript.”

Such persons will often be seen as charismatic

by their constituency.
“Connective Action”
In summary:
“Social movements” have been theorized as relating to:

1. Grievances and Frames (primarily psychological

perspectives)

2. Resources (primarily an organizational perspective)

3. Repertoires (primarily a cultural perspective)

4. Build up of societal discursive pressure (a ‘social physics’

perspective)

5. Connective action (primarily relational)

1. pe
rspective)