Figure 1: Power Elite Model. Figure 2: People Power Model.

↑

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 4 из 11Следующая ⇒

Figure 1: Power Elite Model

The power elite model is the traditional view of democracy. The founding fathers in the United States believed in this model of power; mainstream political and social theories still uphold this model;6 and the public generally still believes in it. From this perspective, democracy is viewed as a struggle between competing societal elites, leaving the vote as the primary, if not the only, means by which the

14 DOING DEMOCRACY: The MAP Model for Organizing Social Movements

general population is expected to participate. Moreover, except for the right to buy or not buy goods, people are totally excluded from the economic system. It is worth noting that as a result of the founding fathers’ power elite idea of democ­ racy, during the first 20 years of U.S. history only propertied, rich, white men, who comprised less than 10 percent of the population, were allowed to vote in federal elections.

Since the majority of people are relatively powerless under the power elite model, social change can be achieved only by appealing to the elites at the top, seeking to get them to change their policies through normal political and institu­ tional channels such as elections, lobbying, and litigation. In this model, the target of social activism is the powerholders and the method is persuasion — activists must try to convince existing powerholders to change their policies, laws, and programs or must elect new powerholders. Professional opposition organiza­ tions (POOs) generally conduct these efforts of the opposition in the halls of government and in corporate suites. On the other side, thousands of well- financed “special interest” groups, representing corporate and other elites, influence national, state, and local governments through elaborate campaign financing and constant lobbying.

The people power model (see Figure 2), on the other hand, holds that power ultimately resides in the mass populace. This model is represented by an inverse triangle, with the people at the top and the power elite at the bottom. This is an ideal that has not yet been attained as an ongoing political arrangement (though it has often been achieved during social activism), but even in societies with strong power elites, whether the United States or a military dictatorship, the powerhold- ers’ power is dependent on the cooperation, acquiescence, and tacit support of the great majority of common citizens.7

THE MAP THEORY OF SOCIAL ACTIVISM 15

Nonviolent social movements are based on the people power model. Not only is placing power in the hands of the people their ultimate goal, but they are also dependent on the power of thf people to create social change. The strategy in a social movement is to mobilize ever-larger numbers of ordinary citizens to assert their power and influence on the corporate and state institutions and also to create alternatives themselves.

POWERHOLDER STRATEGY

Most people living in Western political democracies believe in the ideal of “gov­ ernment by, for, and of the people.” They believe that society should be based on a wide range of basic universal values, such as freedom, democracy, justice, and equality. Consequently, they believe that society’s institutions and social systems should maintain these values and treat everyone equally. Indeed, in the United States, people become upset when they realize that their deeply held values and principles are being violated, especially by powerholder policies and practices.

Powerholders know that social conditions are ripe for change. They are aware that the private and public social system and institutions they head up often violate the peoples cherished ideals. They know that these social systems and institutions unfairly distribute most of society’s benefits to an elite minority at the top and most of the costs to the majority, especially those at the bottom. Consequently, they consciously try to keep their actual policies hidden from the public because they fear that a majority of the general public would rebel if it knew the reality. Power elites do this through a two-track system of societal myths vs. societal secrets and official policies and practices vs. actual policies and practices.

Societal myths vs. societal secrets

Societal myths are the slogans, beliefs, and values — such as, freedom, free market, democracy, and private enterprise — that the powerholders use to justify their self-serving policies and programs. In contrast, societal secrets are the exact opposite of the publicly proclaimed societal myths. They reflect the ideology that actually guides the powerholders as they carry out the power elite model in which most of the political and economic power and benefits go to the elite minority, while most of the disbenefits are borne by the environment and the majority of the people.

The founding fathers, for example, proclaimed the societal myth that the new nation was to be founded on the principle of democracy, but the societal secret was that democracy was only for a handful of rich white men. They real­ ized that the slogan “Democracy for rich white men” would not go over very well with the 90 percent of the population that they called the “outdoors” people.

16 DOING DEMOCRACY: The MAP Model for Organizing Social Movements

Official vs. actual policies and programs

The official policies and practices are those that the powerholders publicly pro­ claim they are implementing. They are consistent with the high-sounding values of the societal myths. In stark contrast, the actual policies and practices are what the powerholders are really doing, which are consistent with the societal secrets. To use the voting rights example again, until the 1960s the societal myth was that the United States, including the South, was a democracy in which every adult had the right to vote. The societal secret, however, was that the southern powerhold­ ers’ ideology permitted only white adults to vote. The official policies and practices were that voter registration offices were open every day and available to anyone who wanted to register to vote. The actual policies and practices were that blacks were prevented from registering to vote through a variety o f means: the reg­ istrars offices closed when blacks arrived, difficult tests were given to blacks but not to whites, and there were grandfather laws saying that you could only vote if your grandfather was registered.

Another example is the bi-annual “tax reform” laws passed by the U.S. Congress. The societal myth is that the powerholders want “tax reform,” which would reduce taxes so that everyone gets a big tax break. The societal secret is that the powerholders believe in tax relief for the rich, but not for the people in the middle or near the bottom. The actual tax policies and practices since the early 1950s reduced the tax rates of the wealthy families 51 percent, while raising rates for middle-income families, a reality not publicized by the powerholders.8

SOCIAL MOVEMENT STRATEGY

Social movements involve a long-term struggle between the movement and the powerholders for the hearts, minds, and support of the majority of the popula­ tion. Before social movements begin, most people are either unaware that a problem exists or don’t believe that they can do anything about it. They believe the powerholders’ societal myths and support the high-sounding official policies and practices, all of which seem to be consistent with the culture’s deeply held values and beliefs. This was the situation before all of the social movements of the past 40 years. For example, before 1963, most Americans thought everyone could vote; before 1967, most thought the war in Vietnam was to preserve democracy for the people there; before 1976, most Americans thought that nuclear power was totally safe, necessary, and too cheap to meter; and before the anti-World Trade Organization (WTO) demonstrations in Seattle in 1999, most thought that corporate globalization was inevitable, provided good jobs for people in the Third World, and was sustainable.

THE MAP THEORY OF SOCIAL ACTIVISM 1 7

The strategy of social movements, therefore, is to alert, educate, and win over an ever-increasing majority of the public. First, the public needs to be con­ vinced that a critical social problem exists. Then it must be convinced that policies need to be changed. And then a majority of people must be mobilized into a force that eventually brings about an acceptable solution.

To carry out this strategy, social movements need to be firmly grounded in the values, symbols, beliefs, sensibilities, and traditions that are important to the general population. Only by proving to the public that the movement, not the powerholders, upholds these values and principles can the movement win over the citizenry and create a level of motivation that inspires people to challenge the powerholders and their policies. By the same token, movement activities and atti­ tudes that violate society’s values and sensibilities, such as acts of violence and rebellious machismo posturing, have the opposite effect — they turn off the mass population, including those people who are already involved, or would like be involved, in the movement.

To achieve the goal of winning over and involving the citizenry, social movements need to reframe the issue by exposing and proving to the public that the powerholders’ actual policies and programs violate the societal myths. The best way to inspire the public to be actively involved in creating social change is to show continuously, over time, the gap between the powerholders’ actual policies and programs and the culture’s values and beliefs. Highlighting this gap is the most critical consciousness raising work and lies at the center of social movement strategy.

GRAND STRATEGY

The grand strategy is the broad framework that describes the overall process of movement success. It provides movement activists with a model they can use to create goals, strategies, tactics, and programs that are consistent with the move­ ment’s long-term goals. A shared understanding of the grand strategy provides activists in various organizations and sub-movements with a basic understanding of how each of their efforts can contribute to attaining the larger movement’s ultimate goal.

Without a grand strategy, the disparate activists and groups involved in a movement do not have a common, consistent basis for planning, organizing, and evaluating their efforts and supporting each other. This leads to inefficiencies and unnecessary dissidence as groups go off in contradictory directions. Moreover, without a grand strategy there is no basis for challenging people and groups, including agents provocateurs, who either inadvertendy or intentionally undercut the effectiveness o f social movements.

18 DOING DEMOCRACY: The MAP Model for Organizing Social Movements

MAP’s grand strategy is based on the people power model of nonviolent social movements. This process includes four strategic steps (see Figure 3): 1. First, social movements must focus directly on the powerholders’ policies and institutions to expose their societal secrets and challenge their actual policies and programs. This involves developing critical analyses, presentations, and publications and using all of the normal channels available to the public, including demonstrations, rallies, and marches that, when necessary, include civil disobedience. These are the activities of MAP Stages Two, Three, and Four. 2. Second, the purpose of these activities is to put the public spotlight on the problem and on the .powerholders’ actual policies and practices in order to alert, educate, win over, involve, and inspire the general public to become involved in the movement. These activities are not intended to get the pow­ erholders to change their policies and practices at this point. 3. Third, social movements then mobilize the general public to put tremendous pressure on the powerholders and social institutions to change their policies and, at the same time, create a new peaceful culture and democratic political conditions. This is what happens during MAP Stages Six and Seven. 4. Fourth, these activities attract additional members of the general public to become social activists and either join existing movement organizations and activities or create their own.

Figure 3: The Grand Strategy: The Process of Creating Participatory Democracy

THE MAP THEORY OF SOCIAL ACTIVISM 19

ASSUMPTIONS

The Movement Action Plan is based on the belief that nonviolent social move­ ments are a powerful means for mobilizing people to become involved in a dynamic political process to address and resolve critical social problems. MAP has four underlying assumptions: 1. A chief cause of social problems is the concentration of political and eco­ nomic power in a few elite individuals and institutions that act in their own self-interest. The political and economic powerholders act to benefit the priv­ ileged minority, while disbenefitting the majority and the general welfare to the detriment of the sustainability of the economy, environment, and natural resources. 2. Participatory democracy is a key means for resolving todays awesome soci­ etal problems and for establishing a just and sustainable world for everyone. The resolution of todays problems, therefore, requires an informed, empow­ ered, and politicized population that assertively participates in the political and economic process to demand democracy, justice, security, equality, human welfare, peace, and environmental sustainability. Hence the basic theme of MAP is people power, a theme that is being sounded around the world. 3. Political and economic power ultimately rest with the majority population; the powerholders in any society can only rule as long as they have the con­ sent or acquiescence of the people. The general population usually supports society’s powerholders and institutions as long as they are perceived to be upholding the public trust by carrying out the interests and widely held beliefs and values of the whole society. All powerholders and governments, whether democratic or dictatorial, know this, which is why they spend vast amounts of time, effort, and money justifying their legitimacy to the citizenry 4. The most important issue today is the struggle between the majority of cit­ izens and the individual and institutional powerholders to determine whether society will be based on the power elite or people power model. This struggle, between a belief in superiority and a belief in equality, is going on at all levels of life in the political, economic and social spheres of both democratic and totalitarian societies. It is also taking place in interpersonal relationships at work, in the community, or at home, and within social activism itself.

CONCLUSIONS

If a nonviolent social movement is to successfully address critical societal issues and create social change, it must be solidly based in participatory democracy, with

20 DOING DEMOCRACY: The MAP Model for Organizing Social Movements

a clear understanding of power — and of how to create people power that can withstand the onslaught of powerholder attack and counter-attack. The strategic requirements for social movements described by MAP run counter to the views held by some of todays activists. For instance, MAP makes it clear that social movements are not “happenings,” where everyone is free to come and “do their own thing” - an obvious recipe for disaster. Quite the opposite. Organizing ah effective social movement requires an understanding that social movements work as open-ended holistic systems with positive and negative feedback loops. What every component part of the movement does affects the entire movement, either negatively or positively, depending on how it fits into the overall strategic require­ ments for the movement.

The next two chapters will describe some of the main components: the four roles of activism and the eight stages of social movements. Then in Chapter 4 I will show how MAP can help activists believe in the power of their social move­ ments and make them successful.

2 The Four Roles of Social Activism

W

E ALL PLAY DIFFERENT ROLES IN LIFE. We are children to our parents and parents to our children. Sometimes we are conscious of the shift in roles and sometimes not. Activists need to become aware of the roles they and their organizations are playing in the larger social movement. There are four different roles activists and social movements need to play in order to successfully create social change: the citizen, rebel, change agent, and reformer. Each role has differ­ ent purposes, styles, skills, and needs and can be played effectively or ineffectively. Social movement activists need first to be seen by the public as responsible citizens. They must win the respect and, ultimately, the acceptance of the major­ ity of ordinary citizens in order for their movements to succeed. Consequently, citizen activists need to say “Yes!” to those fundamental principles, values, and symbols of a good society that are also accepted by the general public. At the same time, activists must be rebels who say a loud “No!” and protest social con­ ditions and institutional policies and practices that violate core societal values and principles. Activists need to be change agents who work to educate, organ­ ize, and involve the general public to actively oppose present policies and seek positive, constructive solutions. Finally, activists must also be reformers who work with the official political and judicial structures to incorporate solutions into new laws and the policies and practices of society’s public and private insti­ tutions. Then they must work to get them accepted as the new conventional wisdom of mainstream society.

IMPORTANCE OF THE FOUR ROLES

Both individual activists and movement organizations need to understand that social movements require all four roles and that participants and their organizations

22 DOING DEMOCRACY: The MAP Model for Organizing Social Movements

can choose which ones to play depending on their own make-up and the needs of the movement. Moreover, they need to distinguish between effective and inef­ fective ways of playing these roles. This is especially important because many of the ineffective ways of performing these roles have been accepted as normal and acceptable social movement behavior. The Four Roles Model provides activists with a basis for choosing appropriate roles, evaluating their behavior, and holding themselves, as well as other activists and organizations, accountable for their actions.

Understanding a social movement’s need to have all four roles played effec­ tively can also help reduce antagonism and promote cooperation among different groups of activists and organizations. Rebels and reformers, for example, often dislike one another, each thinking that their own approach is the politically correct one and that those playing the other role undermine the success of the movement. However, when activists realize that the success of their movement requires all four roles, they can more easily accept, support and cooperate with each other.

PLAYING THE FOUR ROLES EFFECTIVELY

To play any of the four roles effectively, activists and their movements need to act in accordance with society’s widely held democratic and human values. They must also behave in ways that are consistent with the long-term goafs of the social movement and the vision of a good society. Besides following these guidelines, each role is different, defined by specific characteristics described in the following sections.

The citizen

Most Americans claim to be patriots, who firmly believe in the United States and its values, laws, and traditions. Although many people have become disenchanted with politicians, government bureaucracy, and the political and economic elite powerholders, they typically support the status quo on most key issues. Mistakenly, they often believe that the official institutions and powerholders are upholding society’s values, principles, and laws. To gain a hearing from the major­ ity of citizens, social movements need to be seen by the majority as the true promoters of society’s basic values and beliefs. Most importantly, activists must remind the public that the source of legitimate power is the citizenry and not self- serving interest groups or institutional political and economic powerholders.

The key to movement success is ultimately winning over and involving the great majority of the public. In order to do this, social movement activists and organizations must be perceived by that majority as “good citizens” who are

\/

seeking the public good. The social movement needs to consciously place itself squarely in the center of society, not on its fringe. Keep in mind, however, that a chief strategy of the powerholders is to discredit the movement in the eyes of the public by portraying the movement as violent or anti-American. In the United States, powerholders have attempted to characterize activists as repugnant to Americans and the American way of life. Therefore, the more the movement is grounded in democratic values and national norms, the more likely it will be able to withstand these attacks and gain the influence and involvement of the general citizenry.

Activists must take advantage of the tendency for people to shut out infor­ mation that contradicts what they already believe, while selectively admitting information that reinforces preexisting opinions and beliefs. (Psychologists call this “confirmatory bias.”) Activists can use confirmatory bias to their advantage by highlighting their commitment to society’s most cherished values. Social movements can also enlist the support and involvement of popular individuals and groups, such as entertainers, teachers, scientists, and religious groups, to help overcome the natural tendency of people to resist social change efforts and their new information and concepts.

Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela are two of the most prominent models of the effective citizen. King and the 1960s black civil rights movement exemplified the citizen principle. While challenging racism across the United States, the movement focused on the American dream of equality and democ­ racy. It did not condemn America, but called for the fulfillment of its vision. Rather than condemning white people, King, especially, challenged them to live up to their own highest standards. Nelson Mandela, after 27 years in jail under South African apartheid, had every right to condemn all South African whites as racists and call for the black majority to violently overthrow the oppressive white regime. Instead, he called upon everyone in the country — black, white, and colored — to work together nonviolently to create a nonracial, democratic society. Both Mandela and King placed their social activism in the center of

■ S^£CL^^ ^tQU5dgd , i^in widely held humanistic values of democracy. _ freedom, equality, and justice to be achieved through active citizen-based democracy.

Over time, as activists fail to see immediate success, the potential increases for them to become frustrated and to act with hostility and violence. A strong commitment to positive social values and nonviolence discourages disgruntled activists from promoting attitudes and activities, including violence, that alienate the general public. Social movements can only achieve their long-term vision by incorporating it into their everyday practice.

In the citizen role, activists -

THE FOUR ROLES OF SOCIAL ACTIVISM 23'

24 DOING DEMOCRACY: The MAP Model for Organizing Social Movements

• advocate and demonstrate a widely held vision of the democratic good society;

• give the movement legitimacy in the eyes of ordinary citizens;

• enable the movement to withstand efforts by powerholders to discredit it; and

• reduce the potential for violent attitudes and actions within the movement.

The rebel

Rebels promote the democratic process, especially when a social problem is not publicly recognized and the normal channels of participatory democracy are not working adequately. They put critical social problems and moral violations in the public spotlight, often with dramatic and controversial actions, and keep them there. They educate ordinary citizens and involve them in dialogue. For example, mass marches, rallies, and civil disobedience launched widespread public discus­ sion of civil rights and the Vietnam war in the 1960s, nuclear energy in the 1970s, nuclear weapons in the 1980s, and corporate-dominated economic globalization as the 21st century dawned. Such public dialogues are the first step to resolving a social problem in a democracy.

Rebels often use extra-parliamentary means, that is, methods outside of normal political channels, including nonviolent direct action and community edu­ cation in the form of rallies, marches, leafleting, and petitions. Rebels literally use their bodies to stop the wheels and mechanisms o f official institutions and power- holders. They block trains to prevent the transport of nuclear weapons, barricade doorways to keep officials from doing business, sit in trees to prevent logging, or protest corporate globalization with street demonstrations.

Rebels are usually the first to be recognized publicly as challenging the status quo. Nonviolent direct actions produce what Martin Luther King called “creative tension” by directing the publics focus to the gap between “what is and what should be.” The rebel’s work is sometimes dramatic, exciting, courageous, risky, and, occasionally, even dangerous.,The rebel role requires courage, commitment, time, and a willingness to take risks, with the consequent danger of ridicule, sanc­ tions, jail, loss of employment, burnout, disillusionment, and loss of life. As they confront the institutions of power, rebels are at the center of movement action and public attention, especially in the movements “take-off” stage.

In the rebel role, activists -

• put issues on society’s social agenda through dramatic, nonviolent actions;

• put issues on the political agenda; y show how institutions and official powerholders violate public trust by causing

'and perpetuating critical social problems;

force society to face its problems; represent society’s democratic and moral vanguard; and promote democracy.

THE FOUR ROLES OF SOCIAL ACTIVISM 25

Change agent

The ultimate goal o f a social movement is to create a healthy citizen-based democ­ racy in which citizens are restored as the basic source of political legitimacy. Social movements accomplish this by alerting and educating the public about existing conditions and policies that violate widely held values. They must involve the whole society in the long-term process of social change, which includes changing current views and promoting alternatives. The true constituency of the change agent is the general public, particularly those people who are directly involved and affected by the social problem being addressed, but not the powerholders. In this process, activists work to redefine the problem to show how it affects every sector of society according to race, class, gender, location, social status, demographic, religion, etc., in order to involve everyone in the process of resolution.

Change agents play the key role when a movement has gained majority public opinion, just as rebels play the central role during a movements take-off stage. In contrast to rebels, who put themselves in the public spotlight through direct action, change agents are less visible as they organize, enable, and nurture others to become actively involved in the democratic process. The change agents goal, therefore, is to hejp create anjopen, public, democratic, and dialectic process in which ail segrp.eiUS.of society are engaged in resolving social problems. The change agents role in building participatory democracy and creating new demo­ cratic structures is as important as winning on a specific issue.

This democratic organizing process requires activists to claim only that they have relative, not absolute truth. That is, the movement does not claim to have The Answer, only its own informed opinion. It provides a forum for all segments o f the population to publicly discuss their own views on the issue. The process of democ­ racy encourages all people to promote their own opinions in the public arena in order to achieve a resolution in which everyone’s views and needs are considered.

Change agents not only help citizens redress the symptoms of a social problem, but they also promote the need to shift the paradigm or traditional viewpoint. That is, the movement must use the immediate symptoms of a specific social problem to educate and j>romote a change in the underlying worldview that causes the problem For example, in'ad3ition to opposing nuclear energy, activists promoted the use of “soft energy,” which included conservation and efficiency in energy use, as well as using energy sources that were renewable and less polluting (such as solar, wind, and water), as an alternative to the widely accepted “hard energy” path of inefficient and maximum consumption of energy from nonre­ newable and polluting fossil fuels like gas and oil. Such shifts in perspective take time, so change agents must educate, motivate, and train chizen actiyjsts and help them orgamzeloftheTongT^ by providing a long-term perspective.

26 DOING DEMOCRACY: The MAP Model for Organizing Social Movements

In the change agent role, activists -

• promote citizen-based democracy;

• support the involvement of large numbers of people in the process of address­ ing a specific social problem;

• redefine the problem to show how it affects every sector of society;

• promote a new social and political majority consensus favoring positive solu­ tions,

• promote democratic principles and human values in an “open system” (that is, a system that is organized by citizens themselves, without being controlled by elite powerholders in the closed system of an oppressive hierarchy);1

• develop the majority movement;

• support the development of coalitions;

• counter the actions of the powerholders; and

• move society from reform to social change by promoting a paradigm shift.

The Reformer

It is not enough to convince and involve the majority of citizens to oppose spe­ cific social conditions and advocate alternatives. Reformers must then convert the acceptance of alternatives into new laws, policies, and practices of society’s appropriate poIiticaJ,7ej^7 social, and economic ^institutions. This requires par­ liamentary and legal strategies ana actions, such as referenda, political campaigns, lawsuits, committee and commission hearings, and petitions, which make use of official judicial, legislative, political, and other institutional^ chan- nels. In carrying outffus role," social" movement reformers, often act as power brokers between the movement and the mainstream legal, political, economic, and legislative institutions and powerholders. One example oFthis role is the work oFU.S. activists to ensure passage o f legislation to re-authorize the Violence Against Women Act so that resources are available to carry out the policy changes achieved through social action. Another example is provided by the successful anti-nuclear energy movements in most Western European nations, which cul­ minated in government declarations that no new nuclear energy reactors would be built. i

q

This role is often played by the more establishment-oriented progressive people in large Professional Opposition Organizations (POOs), which have paid staff, boards of directors, large budgets, and powerful executive directors. The executive director and staff usually run their programs, while the grassroots members provide the mass political clout needed for the reforms to be enacted. In other words, reformers themselves have little innate power but are dependent on the power of the grassroots to create social change.

In the reformer role, activists -

THE FOUR ROLES OF SOCIAL ACTIVISM 27

• transmit movement analyses and goals to powerholder institutions and indi­ viduals;

• perform parliamentary and legal efforts — lobbying, referenda, lawsuits;

• work to create and expand new laws and policies;

• act as watchdogs to ensure the new laws and policies are actually funded and carried out;

• mobilize movement opposition to conservative backlash efforts; and

• nurture and support grassroots activists.

BARRIERS TO PLAYING THE FOUR ROLES EFFECTIVELY

Some activists have difficulty playing the four roles effectively. They may believe the roles are in conflict with each other because they fulfill different needs and require different styles, skills, and activities. The citizen says “yes” to society, while the rebel says “no,” advocating protest against existing conditions and official institutional policies. In contrast to the rebel, the change agent says “yes,” while advocating alternatives and supporting the broader public as people become active in bringing about change. The reformer also says “yes” and works with the public, grassroots activists, and the official institutions and powerholders to formalize the alternatives into new laws, policies, and structures. The reformer often compro­ mises by advocating far less than what both rebels and change agents want.

Each role involves different political beliefs, attitudes, organizational arrange­ ments, funding sources, organizing styles and methods, emotional qualities, personalities, and behaviors. Consequently, most activists and movement groups identify primarily with only one or two of the four roles. They may consider the roles that they play as the most important, while viewing those playing other roles as naive, politically incorrect, uninformed, ineffective, or, even worse, the enemy. Rebels, for example, often think that direct action is the only approach that makes sense against entrenched institutions and powerholders, especially since they believe that time is of the essence. Conversely, reformers may think that rebel actions, such as protest and resistance in the streets, are useless or undermine their own efforts. They fear that such activities alienate both the public and the power- holders and make it more difficult for them to work through the established institutions.

Activists need to recognize that successful social movements require all four roles to be played effectively and, to that end, should learn how to play all four roles. Dissension between those playing different roles heightens competition and reduces the movements power and effectiveness. At the minimum, activists need to become allies with those playing other roles, since cooperation and mutual support will enhance the movement’s likelihood of success.

28 DOING DEMOCRACY: The MAP Model for Organizing Social Movements

Познавательные статьи:



Техника нижней прямой подачи мяча

Комплекс физических упражнений для развития мышц плечевого пояса

Стандарт Порядок надевания противочумного костюма

Общеразвивающие упражнения без предметов