What have social movements contributed to modern political practice?

The term social movement is in contention amongst modern political and sociological
scholars but for the sake of this essay it will be defined as: ‘a sequence(s) of contentious
politics based on underlying social networks, on resonant collective action frames, and on the
capacity to maintain sustained challenges against powerful opponents’ ( Tarrow, Sidney
2011). There are some terms within the definition which require further simplification like
that of ‘contentious politics’ which is when ordinary people join forces in confrontation with
elites, authority or opponents; ‘frames’ relates the simplification of a grievance by
establishing the binary of ‘them’ versus ‘us’; ‘social networks’ often being the institution
which the movement inhabits to spread its ideology like the black church in the civil rights
movements (Tarrow, Sidney 2011). As social movements have evolved in conjunction with
the societal structures in which they take place, they have arguably made large contributions
to modern political practice, in increasing suffrage, reinforcing the welfare state and
introducing an age of ‘internationalization’ (Tarrow, Sidney 2011) which entails the growth
of more international political institutions like the IMF.

A primary effect of social movements in the practice of modern politics today is an increase
in suffrage which widens the scope of people that political actors account for. The ‘universal
suffrage’ as is practiced currently is particularly a product of the civil rights movements of
the 20th century. The reform movements, specifically the women’s’ suffrage movement in
America which ratified the 19 th amendment in the 1920s, and the Black Civil Rights
Movement which through the Voting Rights Acts of 1965 guaranteed suffrage for African
Americans under the 15th amendment –; increased(ing) the number of citizens with direct
political influence. When the votership of the nation increases to display otherwise
marginalized groups, in democratic and representative governments the construction of the
government changes to include these new groups of voters. Politicians, in appeals to gather a
majority, began to indulge in identity politics understanding that they could offer the ballot as
a legitimate means of political contention, in other words, these marginalized groups had a
new means by which they could formalise and share their grievances with the elites,
administrators and opposition - there was a marked shift from ‘less than 5% of people in the
40’s’ to ‘more than half the public’ between 1963 to 1965 viewing Civil Rights as the ‘most
important problem’ (Santoro, Wayne 2008). Thus, political actors begin to campaign on the
basis of ‘inequality or injustice and with the aim of asserting group distinctiveness and
belonging and gaining power and recognition’ (Neofotistos, 2013). In essence, the civil rights
social movements introduced a higher amount of suffrage to the practice of modern politics,
additionally, it has adjusted the basis of the campaigns of political actors often in
democracies to the terrain of identity politics.

Often, the politically malcontent are not just culturally, but economically disadvantaged
groups meaning, when protest occurs it is ‘often connected with economics’ (Martti
Siisiäinen, 1996) arising for the sake of greater redistribution of income which requires the
reinforcement of the welfare state. There is evidence across Europe in post-World War states,
where social movements like the Labour Movements provided pressure to find ‘solutions to
the particular social problems of specific groups’ namely ‘poverty’ which was considered a
‘paramount issue’ (Frank Nullmeier, Franz-Xaver Kaufmann, 2010). The labour movements
of the 20th century capitalized on unusually low unemployment rates of 4.7% (Bureau of
Labour Statistics, 1942, J.R. Vernon, 1994 : 852), as well as on the government’s post-war
more effective tax collection (Obinger Herbert, Schmitt Carina 2017) to demand subsidized
support for the soldiers reintegrating into the workforce. The uncertainty of economies post-
war led to a ‘shift in individual preferences towards redistribution and risk-pooling’,
additionally, when combined with the shared experience of war hardship there was an
increase in solidarity (Titmuss, 1950:508) consequently an increase in trade union movement
membership in 1950 representing 44-45% of the workforce as opposed to 10.6% in 1892.
Resultantly, the bargaining of groups of workers for the cause of increased state provision of
social benefits was larger which across the continent of post-war Europe introduced many of
the ‘social securities’ we take for granted in the modern state like pension scheme brought to
the forefront of politics by the Townsend Movement of 1933, or the Share Our Wealth
Movement which in 1835 proposed a basic income for American families of $5,000 (per
annum). Overall, social movements particularly those post world wars created the much of
the impetus and infrastructure for welfare states some of which remain in our modern
political practice.

Thirdly, social movements particularly the Human Rights Movements have led to the
strengthening of international political actors under the belief ‘there was a nexus between
national social and political orders and international peace’ (Frank Nullmeier, Franz-Xaver
Kaufmann, 2010). Essentially, through the reinforcement of shared universal human rights
there could be an end to foreign atrocities from which would ensue global stability that would
guarantee the stability of domestic nations from belligerent foreign ones. We can explain the
adoption of universal rights following the theory laid down by Tarrow that modern media
gives social movements greater outreach to different global communities thus expanding the
‘frame’ – the people who can be considered part of the movement. The expansion of the
‘frame’ due to developments in technology was reinforced by the increased ability of
‘association’ (Tarrow, Sidney 2011) in the shared experience of the world war hardships
across Europe. This provides the onus for a global perspective which social movements
pushed for governments to execute via the formation of international institutions like the
United Nations (1945), UNICEF (1945), World Bank (1944), World Health Organization
(1948), and the International Monetary Foundation (1945). The establishment of these
international organizations normalized the political practice of foreign intervention for
humanitarian causes – ‘presidents from the end of World War II until the early to mid-1970’s
had a relatively easy time putting together broad partisan majorities to support their foreign
policy (typically almost half of the time in the House and closer to 60% of the time in the
senate)’ (Hillebrecht, Hildebrandt, P.M Holm, J. Pevehouse, 2013). Half a century later
intervention for a humanitarian cause has formed the moral basis for invading foreign nations
i.e., to free the people from oppressive rule in Iraq by the Americans. The effect of social
movements in this regard can then be explained as having changed the perspective to foreign
intervention of other sovereign states, who, in violation of some international standard must
be punished. This can take other forms like the commonly advocated for by the people means
of sanctions wherein the state can internalize the mechanism of boycotting on behalf of its
people and on a macro-scale impose a ban on the import from a nation or export to a nation –
evidenced by recent action as of 3rd June 2022 to Russia by the EU.

Ultimately, there are a myriad of ways in which social movements has contributed to modern
political practice reflected by the fact that between 1979 to 2022, 58.02% of social
movements have had effects varying from policy reform to increasing political participation
(Diego Galego, 2021) . Its effects on suffrage have increased marginalised groups
representation and acted as a catalyst for the development of identity politics which overtly
changes the practice of campaigning. Whilst having done this, social movements around the
mid 20th century pushed for a stronger welfare state, which though diminished from the
Golden Age we still see its derivatives i.e., mandatory pension schemes in countries across
Europe and the provision of job seekers allowance or universal basic income. Thirdly, under
the aegis of domestic protection social movements have worked to normalize foreign
intervention on a humanitarian basis, though this is how it originated in the 1940’s, it could
be argued that state intervention has evolved past merely economic aid and sanctions into
legitimizing putting domestic troops on foreign soil. Thus, the effect of social movements has
been on both domestic and international politics, the practice of political actors addressing of
citizens, the resources feel entitled to which political actors still cater for and setting a
precedence the criterion of foreign intervention.

Bibliography :

Koopmans, Ruud (2009), “Social Movements”, in The Oxford Handbook of Political

Behavior, ed. by Russell J. Dalton and Hans-Dieter Klingemann, 1st ed., Oxford University
Press, pp. 693–707, DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199270125. 003.0037.

Tarrow, Sidney (2011), Power in Movement: Social Movements and Contentious Politics, 3rd
ed., Cambridge ; New York: Cambridge University Press.

Vasiliki Neofotistos (2013). "Identity Politics". Oxford Bibliographies. Oxford University

Press. Archived from the original on 27 October 2018. Retrieved 18 February 2019.

OBINGER, H. and SCHMITT, C. (2018), The impact of the Second World War on postwar
social spending. European Journal of Political Research, 57: 496-
517. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12236

Castles, Francis G. and others (eds),

The Oxford Handbook of the Welfare State
(2010; online edn, Oxford Academic, 2 Sept.
2010), https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199579396.001.0001, accessed 1 Nov. 2022.

Siisiäinen, M. (1992), Social Movements, Voluntary Associations and Cycles of Protest in

Finland 1905-91. Scandinavian Political Studies, 15: 21-40. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-
9477.1992.tb00129.x

Brannen, Samuel J., et al. “Front Matter.” The Age of Mass Protests: Understanding an
Escalating Global Trend, Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), 2020, p. I–
II. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep22600.1. Accessed 8 Nov. 2022.

Santoro, Wayne A. “The Civil Rights Movement and the Right to Vote: Black Protest,
Segregationist Violence and the Audience.” Social Forces, vol. 86, no. 4, 2008, pp. 1391–
414. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/20430815. Accessed 8 Nov. 2022.

Vernon, J. R. “World War II Fiscal Policies and the End of the Great Depression.” The
Journal of Economic History, vol. 54, no. 4, 1994, pp. 850–68. JSTOR,
http://www.jstor.org/stable/2123613. Accessed 8 Nov. 2022.
Hildebrandt, Timothy, et al. “The Domestic Politics of Humanitarian Intervention: Public
Opinion, Partisanship, and Ideology.” Foreign Policy Analysis, vol. 9, no. 3, 2013, pp. 243–
66. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/24910774. Accessed 8 Nov. 2022.