The Interplay between the State, the Market, and Culture in Shaping Civil Society: A Case Study of the People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy in South Korea (original) (raw)
Related papers
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13895-0\_98-1 Social movements have become a constitutive part of contemporary societies, especially so in democratic contexts where the institutional conditions allow for movements to be formed and express themselves freely. They involve conflictual relations with clearly identified opponents, are linked by dense informal networks, share a distinct collective identity, and engage primarily – but not exclusively – in protest activities. Explanations of movement mobilization have typically stressed a number of key factors, or combinations thereof: in particular, grievances, mobilizing structures, political opportunities, and framing processes. This chapter provides an overview of some key aspects relating to the study of social movements. Given the breath of this field, it can only be very selective in doing so. The chapter first addresses the question of the definition of social movements. Then it moves on to looking at the ways in which they have been studied. Finally, it briefly discusses what movements leave behind them, that is, the issue of their outcomes and consequences. The chapter concludes with a summary of the most salient aspects addressed and some directions for future research.
SOCIAL MOVEMENTS IN NEW DEMOCRACIES: SPECIALIZATION AND OWNERSHIP
2018
The restoration of democratic regimes in the Philippines and Brazil in the 1980s provided an opportunity to redefine the relationship between the state and social movements. As movements carried their advocacies into the new democratic regimes, activism became about how movements could shape nascent democratic institutions to expand and regularize movement access, while simultaneously preparing the movement itself to take part in institutional decision-making. These new opportunities and institutions thus necessitated new repertoires of contention. This dissertation seeks to add to our understanding about these processes by answering two questions: How have social movements navigated the new democratic space? and, What determines the kinds of repertoires social movement actors adopted? Through the in-depth process tracing of four social movement campaigns, which included my personal attendance at meetings, fora, and strategy sessions, as well as over eighty interviews, I make two arguments to explain how social movement actors in the Philippines and Brazil chose their repertoires. First, social movement organizations working on a given issue carve out specialized niches for themselves in terms of skills, target sector, areas of influence, and political ideology. Thus, when social movement organizations work together on a particular issue or campaign, a division of labor develops that can allow the movement to approach the issue on a variety of strategic fronts. Second, social movement organizations in democratic Philippines and Brazil emphasized framing their strategies and tactics in terms of sectoral ownership and decision via collective processes. Sectoral ownership, or framing a campaign or advocacy as being the demand of the affected sector itself, is important for social movement organizations to compete with both the state as well as other organizations as the “legitimate” representative of the people. Relatedly, collective decision-making processes are emphasized in order to provide a quasi-formal veneer to this claim of legitimate representation, as well as to act as a parallel to the democratic processes that movements urge the state to follow. Thus, the hope is that internal processes both put pressure on the state to adopt democratic policy-making processes, while simultaneously preparing social movement members to eventually participate in such state processes.
PhD Dissertation, 2008
This dissertation tests Esman and Uphoff's model in the context of the 1980s' South Korean student movements. Esman and Uphoff s horizontal networks become linkages established between student groups, church groups, labor groups, intellectuals, and local and central government authorities in the region. The first hypothesis tests whether student protesters can create inclusive horizontal networks with civic groups in their region for the middle class to join when regime repression is high. Using the Kwanju uprising case in 1980, the dissertation finds that the density of Esman and Uphoff s horizontal networks had, in fact, increased with repression. The second hypothesis attempts to test the following: Given constant level of regime repression, the density of Esman and Uphoff s horizontal linkages is positively correlated to the level of middle-class participation in the student movement. The results of event-driven tracing of the political and social processes surrounding the South Korean student networks in 1983-1987 suggest that the statement is false. Middle-class participation did not happen as a result of students networking with the middle class and students' success in mobilizing it through the creation of horizontal linkages. Alienation was a better characterization of the students and middle-class relations, not networking.
Democratic States and Social Movements: Theoretical Arguments and Hypotheses
Social Problems, 1999
In this paper we theorize the impact of democratic states on state-oriented challengers. We argue that aspects of states influence the overall mobilization of state-oriented challengers and the forms of their mobilization and collective action. We develop I2 hypotheses about the impact of state political institutions, democratic processes, bureaucracies, and policies on mobilization and provide illustrative evidence for each from studies of social movements. We also discuss the implications of the hypotheses for U.S. social movements. One key implication is that the U.S. state, comparatively speaking, has discouraged and continues to discourage social mobilization. Another is that the U.S. state has important systematic influences on forms of mobilization and collective action. ). To answer these questions, states have often been held to matter because challengers are often "state-oriented" , in that they target the state and their goals can be achieved only by state action. Challengers that mainly target other societal actors often attempt to use states as leverage against their opponents, and even challengers that are mainly identity-oriented sometimes require state action to realize communitybuilding goals. Perhaps for these reasons social movement scholars are focusing greater attention on states (Amenta and