Social. Movements, old and New A Post-modernist Critique Rajendra Singh © sage publications New Delhi / Thousand oaks / LondonWess PALS Sy contents Preface 9 Acknowledgements " PART I 1, Introduction 15 2, Social Movements: A Generic Perspective 23 Conflict and Collective Action Riot, Rebelion, Revolt, Revolution and Social Movements Social Movemens and Social Change Nota Socal Noverents Universalism of Social Movements Relativism in Soiel Movements The Idea of Social Optimism in Social Moverients Social Renewal Self Acmaliation and Social Movements 3. The Changing Representation of Society and Movements: From Modernity to Post-modernity, Society to Post-sociery and Sociology to Post-sociology 8 Representation of Society and Social Movements Modernity, Post-modernity and Movements Concept of Medemnity Social Character of Post-modernism Collapsing of Paradigm: Post-society and Post-sociology The Concept of Post-society The Concept of Post-socilogy Everyday Life Model Everyday Life Model and the Experience from the Natural Sciences 4. The Theory of Social Movernents: Old and New 37 (Classical Tradition ‘Contemporary Theories of ‘New’ Social Movements ‘The Character of the New Social Movements The Resource Mobilisation Theory/The Identity-oriented Theory A Search for Syrthesis1S Social Movements old.and New PART Il 5, Paradigms of Movement Studies: Old and New 135 Historicty of Social Movements On Conceptualising and Defining Movements ‘Theoretic Tension and Conceptual Crisis ‘The Neo-classical Model and ‘Ola! Social Movernents ‘The Functionalist Framework/Dialecical-Marxist Framework The Dialetical-Marxist Framework of Movement Studies in India 6, The Emerging Paradigm of New Social Movements in India 192 ‘The Social Representation of the Contemporary Indian Society Paradigm of New Social Movement Studies in India Identity, Action, Community Defence and Democratic Crisis Paradigm of New Social Movements in India Paradigms of Old and New Social Movements: A Comparative Analysis 7. Themes in Studies on ‘Old’ and ‘New’ Social Movements in India 216 ‘The Art of Resistance in Everyday Life Pervasiveness of Resistance/Immanence of Resistance Resistance as the Expression of Growing and Survival in Nature Resistance and Collective Action Stadies on ‘Old’ Social Movements Peasant Movements and Agrarian Struggles/Post-bistory sand Peasant Consciousness: Subaltern Studies/ Tribal Movements/ Workers’ Movements ‘Themes of New Social Movement Studies in India Ecology and Environment Movements! Women's Movements: A Perspective/Dalit, Caste and Conversion Movements/ Farmers’ Moverents/Sbnationalism and Semi-autonomy Movements/ Emerging Initiative Groups, Human Rights and Micro-movements 8. Conclusion: Society, Social Movements and Sociology 299 Sociery Social Movements Democratic Theme/ Emphasis on Pluralism/ Knowledge, Communication and Mobility/Decline of Reductionist Ideology sand Rise of Homophilic Upsiage Sociology Bibliography au Subject Index 350 Author Index 357 About the Author 365 Preface ‘The biogrephy ofthis book begins with classroom discussions on social move- rents with students. Ihave been teaching acourseon ‘Social Action and Social Movements’ at the M.Phil. level for more chan two decades. The study of col- lective conflicts, actions and violence in general, and social movements in par- ticular has been my special field of academic concem. My experience of ‘communication vith students over the years increasingly impressed upon me the need for integrating and systematising the connectivities and interdepen- dence between the conceptions of society, science and social movements. Such an endeavour involved analysing and highlighting the changes in the theoretical conception of society, the methodological strucwres of social sciences and their relationship to new social movement. It requted a frame of reference ‘capable of explaining the changing representation of society, structure of sc- ence and che nature of social movements Tc was indeed ahard task. I required a review ofthe existing state of know- «edge, specifically of society and social movements. A review ofthis kind had to necessarily take account of theories and methods ofthe discipline of sociology. Many conceptual terms such 25 rit, revolt, rebelion, change and movement usually employed inthe study of conflictual colletive actions generally suffer from vagueness and ambiguities of meaning, These conceptual terms required clarification. The task became still more difficult asthe available Indian liters ture on this subjects was generally fragmentary and unsystematic. Te was at ths juncture tat I recsived an invitation from the Indian Council of Social Science Research (ICSSR) asking me to prepare the Review Report on ‘Social Movemenss' for the Council's Third Survey of Research in Sociology and Social Anthropology. This opportunity catalysed my exercise of collection and analysis of material for both the Review as wellas the book. Inall, about 66 pages of the revised text of the Review Report, including thelist of references submitted to ICSSR have been included in different sections ofthis book. ‘The subject matter of this volume is addressed 10 two levels of readership. First this book should be of interest to those wio want to understand the nature of the emerging crisis and contradiction ia the contemporary Tndian society Ie would also be helpful to individuals involved in public concerns, political practitioners and ro the grassroots workers of various voluntary ‘organisations. However, the volume is mainly addressed to scholars, researchers and postgraduate students in disciplines ike sociology, anthropology, political science and history20. seclal Movements, old and New publication of this book was delayed by a tesble mishap, In 1998 Iwas, cl ntbe Gl His song why ds nol, Ot vehicle met with an accident. My student and colleague, SudheerE. Michigan, to whom this volume is dedicated, lost is ife. The res of us wer injured. The sadness and trauma left me incapable of expediting che process of publication 1m pn out tothe reader hat the form and mo of dcsion of a vs theoretical and methodological issues inthis volume suggest the want in Social sciences of restoring humans to thes actions. The socal identity ofthe hhuman needs to be restored feom the reiations of his existence which has been eroded in casial sociology. acknowledgements express my thanks to the Indian Council of Social Science Research for invite ing me to prepare the Review Report on Social Movements. As indicated in the Preface of this book, this assignment catalysed the preparation ofthe book. My elder brother, Prof. Yogendra Singh, in addition to making relevant literature ‘on the subject availble to me, offered clarifications on issues relating to theory and method in sociology. Prof. MS. Gore read the unrevised version of this ‘book. He gave me encouragement and moral support during the preparation of this volume. Prof. TK. Oommen made his writings on movement available to sme. I express my gratitude to al of them. My younger daughters, Krtika Singh and Anandita Singh often helped mein introducing lucidity in my writing. Anandita gave me a piece of writing on the behaviour of micro-organisms which I have inciuded in the text (p- 223) of the book. My son Abhayendra Singh gave me academic and secretarial assistance right from the task f editing to the handling of the PC. My wife, Savita Singh gave me al the support I needed. I thank them with love.PARTI1 Introduction This book is about social movements, conflicts and collective ac- tions. It seeks to locate the issues by critically examining them in the context of society and the discipline of sociology. A few claificatory points need to be glaced before the readers First, in the presentation and handling of data on movements and society, we do not treat these two as autonomous categories of sociological knowledge. Second, in our theoretical perspective on the subject we do not see movements and collective actions as two oppositional social entities in a historical situation characterised by conflicts and competition of groups and collectivties. In this book, social movements are not presented as the social representations of trouble, unrest, disruptions and the breaking down of established order in society Society is not necessarily presented as a secure and stable site for living out routine everyday life. Situating a social movement in its social and cultural setting involves introducing the reader to the densely compressed emerg- ing conflictual forces of culture and society in India. In appropriate places, and as and when issues under discussion demand, the theo- retical and methodological contradictions relating to the concep- tions of society and the discipline of sociology will be examined. However, the conflictual image of Indian society and the specific methodological orientation of this book need to be introduced. The following pages briefly describe the methodological bearing of the present study. (On the contemporary face of Indian society, one can easily read the outlines of its hidden tensions and open conflicts. Its ‘body social’ is pockmarked with issues of conflict and competing strug- gles of classes and communities,46 Social Movements, old and New Indian sociology has so far studied the elements of continuities and linkages in the social structure and traditions more thoroughly than the elements of discontinuities and ruptures. It has largely been inattentive to recognising and thus to recording and analysing the massive social data of growing ruptures, often antagonistic both in articulation as well as in orientation, between categories of struc- ture and action; memories of the past and the earthly experiences of today; the conception of polity and the character of the everyday political practice; ruptures between community and society; rural and urban populations; and further, deepening divides between gen- erations and genders, The greatest flaw is sociology’s inability to note the separation between the actors and their actions. This ‘emerging social matrix of ruptures and opposition, in some of their expressions, is poetically captured by VS. Naipaul's India: A Million Mutinies Now (1990). Looking at India from a historical and expressive empiricist’s per- spective, one finds its context and composition historical-specific in nature. Within a broad frame of dialectical processes, the contem- porary reading of social data suggests that Indian society is caught in a double contradiction. On the one hand, India lags behind the ‘West on the path of modernity and development. A massive chunk of its teeming population is made up of the world’s poor and illiter- ate, Its political and economic institutions limp behind those of developed democratic societies. Its modernity is late and its devel- ‘opmental success is slow. On the other hand, without being mod em, India seems to be quick to produce the cultural conditions of the early emergence of post-modernity and post-modernist strug- gles in sociery. Its contemporary struggles are not so much about seeking material gains such as the ownership of land or a share in industrial products, as about the redefinition of norms and values; acquisition of cultural goods and collective symbols; political rights and social justice; and a contest for seeking a public space to act and tw be recognised as actors. The contradictions of late modernity and an early post-modernity. in India are accentuated by the pervading revolution in the field of information technology and the mushrooming of institutions and agencies that produce, control and disseminate its contents. Com- munication not only offers knowledge about universal morality and Introduction 17 ethics, and rational and secular knowledge about the Nature, the Human and the World to the rich and poor in India, but also brings, at a group level, a specific form of a narrowly defined localist cul- tural orientation which is often oppositional in articulation, The expressions of collective action in defence of the community, subnationalism, search for one’s roots and regional identities, femi- nist assertions and the actve use of the arto of resistance, protest and demands for gender identity are some ready examples of the conflictual cultural and social character of our time. ‘At the level of the individual, the post-modernist orientation is, reflected in the assertions of personal liberty, individual autonomy and freedom to choose between alternatives. Indian society, at pres- ent, is a strange site of competing conflicts: universal, local and indi- vidual. This mix of forces sets people on different paths, and generally, in antagonistic pursuits. The conception of society as single body, socially unified in one single social ‘whole’ beneath the connecting civilizational canopy of a pan-Indian culture, is being rendered fragile. The individual seems to wear two faces: one global and the other radically locas, The classical conception of society is in the process of being replaced by the new conception of ‘post- society’. For an analytical handling of the conflictual data of contem- porary Indian society, we treat the conception of post-society as an assemblage of weakly connected classes, groups and communities sewed up into a large social cluster, what conventional sociology refers to as society. 7 In the post-modernist post-society of India, there is a rush to acquire material products and economic prosperity, goods and com- ‘modities including knowledge about body-care, health nutrition, sex and subjectivities. People rush to acquire various mechanical artefacts made available by the success of technological modernity. Bu, at the same time, thereis a simultaneous outburst of the collec- tivities, sometimes violent in expression, making demands in defence of cultural symbols lifestyles, language; and of subjectivist manifes- tation in defence of localised identities such as Kashmiriat, Pun- jabiat and many other subnationalist ideological constructions of Assam, Jharkhand, Gorkhaland, Uttarakhand, etc. Within the rubric of weakening civilizational unity, India is witnessing pluralisation of cultural identities and political self-defence. India’s social48 Social movements, old and New spontaneity is characterised, by double social movements: move- ments of modernity, on the one hand, and movements of post- modernity, on the other. The odd and anomalous combination of these two types of movements composes the historical-specific rep- resentation of contemporary Indian society. ‘This interplay of the elements of modernity and post-modernity produces a social scene criss-crossed by classical social movements as well as new social movements. A contemporary reading of social data suggests that most of India’s present forms of collective action, in their content and direction, and goals and focuses, oscillate between the past and the future—berween the social structural fet- ters it inherits from its tradition and history tenaciously holding it back, and its struggles and movements pushing it forward to the aspirational sites located in the future ; Such a conception of structural tussles and actional tension con- ceived as two opposing analytical categories interacting with each other in conflictual directions produces contentious situations, pro- viding a vantage point to sociology to make a reflexive reading of the post-society aspect, and then, to analyse its forms, the course of collective action, movements and competing aspirations of people. In such a perspective, the constitutive theoretical and method- ological frame of classical sociology tends to undergo a major disci- plinary transformation. The classical sociology of Auguste Comte, Herbert Spencer, Karl Marx and Emile Durkheim down to Talcott Parsons (constituting the steel-frame of the old sociology) suffers the erosion of aging, The challenges of a post-society call for a post- sociological perspective, a new disciplinary enterprise aiming at restoring the actors to their actions, structures to the processes and the representation of post-society to the plural forms of the new social movements, The post-sociological treatment of social issues makes reference to history, co human consciousness and ultimately, to their subjectivities. What we propose is not the total rejection of the classical outfit of the old sociology but an addition to it of a qualitative reflexive perspective in order to understand the subject of the new sociology—aphrase we use as a serviceable synonym for the term post-sociology. a oie west empiricism’ has been used in the book to refer to the reflexive perspective used to conceptualise the idea of mneroduction 19 society and social movement. Expressive empiricism is a specific methodological frame of reference which recognises the nature of social reality as a conjunctive point at which the objectivity of the object tends to merge into the subjectivity of the subject, the re- searcher. In this perspective, there isa crucial aspect of complemen- tarity and participation; objects and subjects participate, complement and highlight each other. Te may be suggested that this type of project necessarily involves a discussion of sociology’s contemporary swing away from the theo- retical structure of classical sociology. The current swing is towards the phenomenclogical articulation of the everyday life (practice) model in sociology. Classical sociology has been metaphorically based on the mimesis of the logical structure of the Newtonian con- ception of the natural world. However, this book suggests that such amimesis suffers from acrisis akin to the crisis brought about in the classical conception of the natural world by the contemporary theo- fies of relativityand quantum mechanics. Drawing upon the experi- ences of the nacural sciences, the book identifies, in the everyday life model, a thzoretical response to the restoration of the actors, and their experiences. The actors and their experiences had suffered an eclipse in the hypostasisation of their actions and group life— family, commurity, society, ete—in the theoretical schema of the chasical (old) sociology. It is worthwhile to examine how the everyday life model helps bring to light an enormous range of resistance data that constitute, to borrow a phrase from James Scott, the weapons of the weal (Weapons of the Weak, 1985). The weapons of the weak constitute the arts of subverting the structures of domination. The practice of such an art always carries a conflictual core. How do women in the setting of patriarchy, workers in the setting of capitalism and peas- ants in the setting of landlordism pervasively invent strategies, tac- tics, tickeries, ruses, lies, etc, and make cunning moves and use disorienting methods to fight the dominant elements? This book deals with everyday life and with the ‘art of resistance’ at appropri- ate places. Against the background of che conception of the historical- specific conflictual face of the Indian society and the emerging ideas of post-society and post-sociology (for a detsiled discussion refer to Chapter 3 of this volume), this book tries to present a post-20 Seclal movements. old and New India, It exam- modernist eritique of social movements studie: . ines the general thematic shift and methodological tensions as re~ flected in those studies and in the contemporary debate on the subject elsewhere. It situates the critique in the transnational setting of social sciences, and examines the subject of society and social movements from a broader and universalised perspective of social sciences. Its thesis is bound to introduce a somewhat different nor- ‘mative orientation to the examination of the logical structures which provide theoretic bases to the movement studies, especially in India. Such an orientation may add to and highlight the types of social movements which are new to the conventional taxonomy of the themes and categories of movement studies in India, However, it may be pointed out that the current debates on conceptions such as old movements, classical movements, new movements, micro- ‘movements, proto-movements and alternative moveraents, or the dis- cussions on beyond social movements have generally been absent in the thematic coverage of movement studies in India. Possibly, these conceptions could not assert their centrality and thematic signifi- cance in the Indian social sciences earlier as they are doing today, though, in the Indian situation, only in a nebulous manner. This book attends to the study of some of the forms of social move- ments, including those which centre around questions of ecology and environment. The central theme of the book is, therefore, the study of social movements. ‘Movements are not made, much less are they launched or led by leaders, Whenever opportunities permit or human disenchantments exhaust the limits of human perseverance, movements decoil (unfold) automatically and reveal themselves in the actions of the awakened conflictual consciousness of the collectivity. Reading of ‘Woodcock (1962) and Wertheim (1974) strengthens our concep- tion of the autonomous and immanent nature of social movements as the integral reality of society Social movements always leave their imprints on social structures, and it is the task of sociology to read and assign meaning to those prints. A wide range of questions and issues—peasant, tribe, gender, worker and industry, ecology, regional autonomy, subnationalism, ete.—are seen on the present Indian social scene. Social movement studies report on the diversity of their nature of dissent and démands. E Introduction 24 Unfortunately, taose dissents and demands, in most Indian studies, are in varying details, seen in an isolated form, treating each type of dissent movement as an island, Their interconnectednessis missing. Unlike those studies, this book posits that the representation of movements illuminates the contemporary nature of Indian society. Studying social movements inescapably involves making a study of society as well. This book is an attempt towards treating society and movement as strategic definers of the validity of each other’s conception. ‘The subject matter of the book is divided into two, parts. The first part contains four interrelated chapters, including this ‘Introdue- tion’. Closely folowing the conceptual and methodological discus- sions of this chapzer, the remaining three chapters of Part I deal with the conceptual issues regarding the articulation of a generic per- spective on the understanding of social movements, Readers will find an attempt towards presenting such a generic perspective in Chapter 2. This chapter includes discussion on the conceptual li! ages and separation between the different expressions of collective action and social movement. Chapter 3 is devoted to analysing and highlighting the conflictual and transformational social matrix of Indian society. This chapter presents an outline of the social zepre- sentation of Indian society, and also a discussion on some of the ‘major transformational thrusts such as the movement from moder- nity t0 post-modernity, society to post-sociery, and sociology to post-sociology and everyday life. These transformational thrusts constitute the historical-specifie individuality of contemporary Indian socie:y, and they forge linkages with the emergence of vari- ‘ous forms of social movements. Chapter 4 examines the current theories of old and new social movements. Part IT of the book presents a conceptual critique of the various studies on social movements in India. It contains another four chapters. These chaptets and their sections and subsections exam- ine the historicity of social movements, issues in conceptualising social movements, theoretic tensions and the current conceptual crisis and a critique of the neoclassical models of (old) social move- ments. Chapter 5 also examines the strengths and limitations of the conventional functionalist and Marxist paradigms of movement studies in India. Chapter 6 deals with the social background of the22, sectal_Mevements, old.and New emergence of the new social movements (NSM) in India. Chapter 7 contains an evaluative picture of the various themes of movement studies in India. Chapter 8 recaptures the theoretical issues gener- ated in the preceding chapters and attempts to presenta unified per- spective on the representations of society and social movements in the critical context of sociology. z Soctal Movements: A Generic perspective In order to provide a theoretical perspective to the presentation of this analytical critique, a few preliminary observations need to be made explicit. These observations relate to the nature of axioms and. premises on which the logical structure of social movement studies is generally built by Indian scholars. For such an undertaking, itis necessary that, before we analyse the studies by others, we present our own theoretic perspective on studies on movements. This we intend to do with the minimum of referential details, Its often not true that social movements and their social bases (crudely referred to as factors and causes of movements) are recent, new and modern data of human society. Like the autonomous exis- tence of the reality of society, one has to recognise that social move- ments also have an existence independent of their social biographers and historians. Social movements have the same Durkheimian sui generis autonomy and transcendence as the phenomenon of society itself. Both society and social movement are constructions, and each validates the authenticity of the other's existence. If society is a col- lective social entity itis so because it is always defined by collective social actions. Stripped of actions, the conception of society disap- pears. We need to realise that what is ‘recent’ and ‘new’, (about social movements) therefore, is not so much the emergence of the phenomenon of social movements and the crystallisation of social forces which find expression in them, a the social science treatment of social movements constituting a substantive field of social sci- ence inquiry and research Seen in the above perspective, we should recognise that the immanence of social movements and the basic social conditions of24 Social Movements, old and Now which movements are expressive extensions, tend to lie deep in and are inalienably linked with certain relatively permanent, generally inevitable and stubborn social structural contradictions and con- flicts in the make-up of society. Social contradictions and conflicts inhere in the very nature of the founding of human society and social organisation. Social science scholars of movements and change (such as Gore 198%; Oommen 1990a and Singh 1993) in India, and in Europe and the US (such as Oberschall 1973; C. Tilly etal. 1975; C. Tilly 1978; Habermas 1981, 1985; Gamson etal. 1982; J. Cohen 1983; Eyerman 1984; Eyerman and Jamison 1991 and Touraine 1992) pointed out this criticality of social structures in the study of movements, In Indian writings on movements, such insightful reflections are seen, for example, in the writings of Gore and Yogendra Singh. Gore rightly observes, ‘movements are not idiosyncratic events which ust happen’ (1989a: 15), and ‘since con- flicts always exist’, he pithly remarks, ‘the potential for a movement to arise also exists" (ibid.: 17). Social change and transformation of societies, aecording to Yogendra Singh, can generally be seen as responses ‘to a et of key challenges to the evolution of this society” (1993: 11). These observations ar illustrative examples of the theo- retic centrality given by scholars to the existence of conflict and contradiction in society. But some crucial questions remain un- answered. ‘Why do (must) social conflicts exist in society in order to give rise to social movements? Why are societies made to throw up ‘key challenges’ to be responded to? These are not small questions one can easily set aside. A theoretic perspective to comprehending and analysing social movements has to respond to these basic questions, In order to develop a generic perspective on the study of social movements in a broader frame of reference, one has to respond to these questions. The answers are to be sought in the relatively imperfect and mostly unfinished making of the living empirical societies. In the process of their own emergence and making, human s teleo- logically close in upon themselves. At the critical core are issues such as inequality, social jastice and human dignity. The conven- tional conception of society and its functional prerequisites artieu- lated by some scholars (Aberle et al. 1950: 100-111) generally Soclal Movements A Generis perspective 25 present the imaginary of the ‘made society’. Their functionalist ‘model does not highlight the process of conflicts and tensions involved in the making of the society. Becoming of a society is a process which involves not only an increase in the protection and security of groups and individual in the consensual setting of soci- ety, as Aberle et al. would like us to imagine, but also the opposite processes of the erosion of their personal liberty and freedom of choice. The use of coercive force and tyranny by some individuals and groups to colonise the dispersed free humans into a system of subjugation, control and punishment constitutes the basic (con- flctual) raw material that generally goes into the making of human society. It is these forces that generally give rise to the conceptions of the social order. It is the grounding of such an order in the sys- tem of institutions (the prescribed ways of behaving), social rules and regulations that sociology has come to refer to as the ‘norma- tive structure’ of society. Tt may be further realised that the system of coercion and con- trol, and their imposition on individuals in the name of social order, peace and harmeny have equally an inevitable tendency to counter- produce the system of opposition and conflicts in society. Suppres- sion and power engenders rejection and opposition. The relentless use of opposition and resistance to the system of power and control is social data as pervasive as the conception of social orderin human societies. Such an oppositional situation generally constitutes the critical core of society. Most complex and hierarchical societies tend to be characterised by the persistence of a conflictual core. We treat the conception of the critical social core in a dynamic analytical perspective which generally contains, and often conceals, an ongoing process of production and reproduction of unresolved social questions and burning issues of society relating to the prob- Jems of social inequalities, superordination and subordination of individuals and groups; structures of domination and rule of one over the other—of castes, classes, ethnic groups, genders, or at a global level, of ore nation over another: These are general social data found in most societies and manifest in most day-to-day transac~ tions of social life. Alberto Melucci’s Ten Hypotheses for the Analysis of New Movements (1981) and Frank and Fuentes’ ‘Nine Thesis on Social Movement’ (1987: 1503-10) provide sensitising macro views26 Soclal, Movements, old and New on social movements as processes of conflicts and tension in societ- ies in general and in the contemporary societies in particular the world over. The point we intend to emphasise is that social situations of inequality and domination, if imposed and maintained by social institutions and agencies, in turn produce a counter situation of resistance, rejection and revolt against those systems of domina- tion. Consequently, social structures can also be conceptualised as an arena of intense and countless encounters between the various contesting groups of the dominating and the dominated social col- lectivities. Seen from this point of view, structures of societies are a site of perpetual tussles between its various competing groups, strata and segments (Rajendra Singh 1988: 29-30, 1989a: 70-71). We believe that the strugele against strength is not an episodic phenom- enon of human beings in history but is (and has been) a recurrent struggle in the pursuit ofits self-production, Conflicts are therefore permanent conffliets, and key challenges are perpettal challenges in most human societies. In nature too, the living world is a site of constant conflicts and challenges between the prey and the preda- tors, and between hosts and parasites. In this line of argument, social movements express the collective efforts of people to demand equality and social justice, and reflect the struggles of people in defence of their cultural and symbolic identities and heritage. Collective actions are the essential and con- tinuing data of society. It calls for an exercise in sociological imagi- nation to realise that, as is the case with the universal and ubiquitous problem of social order and disorder, conformity and deviance, freedom and control, and crime and punishment among all societ- ies, at each stage of their development, social movements and col- lective actions are and have been a universal force of historical agency and action in society. The idea of ‘central social conflict’ and its relationship with movements articulated by Alain Touraine (1992) highlights and reinforces the conceptual thrust of our expla~ nation. Touraine writes, Itis surely impossible to dissociate the concept of social move- ment, ...ftom the representation of social life as, simultaneously, set of cultural representations through which society produces social Movements: Genero Ferspective 27 itself and all the aspects and consequences for a central social con- flict. Thus, the notion of social movement...designates 2 general representation of social life rather than a particular type of phe- nomenon (Touraine 1992: 126) ‘ocial movements and social actions, therefore, did not appear ‘there’ like a dazzling meteor on the horizon of social science vision: they have been ‘there’ ever since society made itself and in the pro- cess ofits own making, inthe scope and sweep of its own evolution in history, founded the conditions of its own critique, acquired its ‘own critical core: the conflicts and contestations around the ques- tion of inequality, domination, freedom and social justice. ‘My perspective on the conception of society and social move- ment tends to be at variance with the conventional notions of soci- ology. The logic of my inquiry and the method of my arguments does introduce some degree of destabilisation into some uncritical notions and imaginaries of society on the one hand, and its relation- ship with the conception of social movements, on the other. A sepa- ration is generally imputed between the conceptions of society, specialy in its organismic and mechanical models (see Stark 1962) and the conception of social movement. The former is conceived as a relatively stable, still and ordered entity, and for most of the purposes of everyday life itis taken to signify a system of fixed arrangement of social relations into an ensemble, a ‘whole’. The lat- ter, the movement, on the other hand, is visualised as an interflow of intense actions, and processes of instability and change. In such an imaginary, the entity ‘society’ gets reflected as an iconic ‘being’ with structure and routinised ‘functions’ —constituting an independent epistemic category different from the conception of movement, which is conceived as ‘becoming’ with a beginning from the former and an ending into itself. Statements of scholars such as ‘social movements are a product of social structure’ (2 Mukherji, cited in, Gore 1989b: 87), exemplify the uncritical assumption of the per- ceived separation between social structure and social movement; 25 if the former is the bed and the latter, the seed. In our theoretic perspective on the conceptions of society and. social movements, we do not see the assumed artificial separation and split between the conceptions of society and movement as a valid proposition. Both are processes. Each one of them, in the28 Social Movements, old. and New everyday life setting, is defined by the other in the state of ‘becom- ing’. Consequently, we suggest that the relationship between soci- ety and social movement can hardly be conceived in terms of cause and effect interlinkage or be symbolised in the ‘seed-bed” and the ‘seed’ metaphors, In fact, each one of them, ie., society and move- ment, can be conceptualized as the expressive continuation and extension of one another. Post-structuralist scholars (such as Laclau 1983 and Laclau and Mouffe 1985) have rightly expressed their doubts about the relevance of the conventional organismic or mechanical conception of society and instead prefer to conceive society as a ‘sutured and self-defined totality’ with no ‘single under- lying principle of fixing’. They state, ‘society is not a valid object of discourse’ (1985: 111). Laclau and Mouffe (ibid.) draw heavily on Jacque Lacan (1966) and Jacques Derrida (1974): from the former, the conception of individual as ‘the speaking and desiring subjects, and of ‘decentred subjectivity’ and from the latter, the conception ot ‘deconstruction’ (1974: 159). Laclau and Mouffe abandon the Marxist notion of the universality of classes and singularity of his- tory and the intelligibility of society as a structure (1985: 2). Michele Barrett (1991: 90-95 and 103) makes an illuminating diag- nosis of this type of theoretic erisis in the emerging nature of con- temporary social sciences thinking. ‘The cbandonment of the idea of society as a totality (of social relations) imbued with inherent cohesive centriperality of its own, in favour of the conception of society as a plural (or assembled) social entity from which the centrifugal nature of social conflicts, ‘opposing contestations, claims and demands emerge and operate, initiates a radical paradigm shift in the conception of society and movements. It generates an alternative system of logic in support of the emerging conceptions of post-society and the NSMs. I will dis- cuss the classical (old) movements, the emerging image of post- society and the nature of the NSMs at appropriate places in this book. k At this juncture, iis important that I briefly discuss the sense in which I use certain conceptual terms and phrases in this book. I presentbelow a theoretical clarification on the conceptual meaning of terms and phrases such as social conflicts and collective action, riot, revolt, revolution and social movement. I will attempt an Social. Movements: Generte perspective 29 analysis of their relationship with each other later in the book. Iwill also attempt to separate the foci of social movements from those of social change. Further, I will perform some exercise in identifying and presenting a set of relatively consistent ideal-typical character~ istics of social novements. These characteristics, once identified, can be treated as constituting the ‘normal type’ image of social move- ment and as a form of the specific expression of social reality. We will be making frequent use of conceptual terms and phrases such as social conflicts, collective action, rit, rebellion, revolt, rev- olution, and social movement. Despite the fact that the book is essentially on the study of social movements, itis important that we present a brie analytical discussion on the conceptual meaning atid interlinkage of these terms for these are satellite conceptions fre- quently appearing in the course of discussion and analysis of social movements, These terms will also be found in the writings of schol ars discussed in the book. We need to understand that not all forms of conflict lead to collective action, and likewise, not all forms of collective action lead to social movements. Why do some conflicts lead to collective actions and not others? What are the differences and interlinkages between different forms and expressions of collective ac- tions such as rot, revolt, revolution and social movements? These are some of the questions requiring elucidation, We next present a brief classificatory conceptual discussion in response to these questions, conflict and, collective Action Let us begin with social conflict. Social conflict is essentially an interactional concept. It presupposes the existence of two or more Persons or groups in a situation of opposing claims and contesta- tions, and i+ involves issues and questions, In the setting of the everyday life, he expressions of conflict may vary in form and inten- sity: Conflict may range from mild disapproval toa violent outburst, assault and killings. Conflicts are the perennial social data of human society and they appear in a variety of individual and group relation- ships in differing situations around different issues. A conflict may surface between husband and wife in the domestic setting, two or more families in the neighbourhood and among workers and between workers and the management in the factory. Expand its80 Seelal Movements, old-and New field and it may manifest itself between larger collectivities like con- ficts between castes, classes, religious communities and gender groups or between state and society. Social conflict generally refers to those types of people's behaviour in relation to others which reflect elements of opposition, strife and struggle for achieving mutually exclusive possession of social values such as power, property, pres- tige and honour at the cost of the other. Lewis Coser rightly ‘defines conflict as a ‘struggle in which the aim is to gain objectives and simultaneously neutralise, injure, or eliminate rivals’ (1956: 8). It invol- ves individuals and groups in an adversarial relation with each other. ‘One has to recognise that the mere existence of conflict does not presuppose the existence of collective action, and in the same way, not all forms of collective action necessarily involve conflicts. Norm-oriented, institutionalised and conventional collective action seen in the form of group participation of people in ceremonies, fes- tivals and on ritual occasions do not involve conflicts and. are there- fore, different from non-institutional conflictual collective actions as those witnessed in the behaviour of a violent crowd, rioting groups, rebellious people, revolutionary comrades and among terrorist brotherhoods (for details see, Smelser 1962: 1-12). In this book, we are interested in the study of conflictual collec- tive actions alone. Conflictual collective action can be defined as the collective effort of a section of people to pursue certain shared objectives, goals and values, even in the face of opposition and con- flict. The only exception, that of the mass participation of all sections of society in a conflictual collective action, is seen in the phenomenon of revolution, which we shall analyse later. It may be understood that only those conflicts manifest in collective actions, which emerge out of collective discontent, denial and deprivation shared by a large number of people who find themselves inthe same situation and have the same consciousness of being deprived to such an extent that they join together to identify the adversary responsi- ble for their misery and initiate remedial action. Such collective actions are non-institutional and tend to have some degree of struc- ture and organisation. Many forms of individual interpersonal, dis- persed and unshared conflicts, even when involving groups, do not lead to collective action. The only exception is the sudden and shortlived phenomenon of crowd action. Crowd action is non- social Movements: Generic perspective St instieutional, It may or may not involve violence. A crowd is face- less and it lacks organisation and structure. Crowd violence may ‘erupt suddenly around episodic conflictual issues. It may disappear quickly too. A crowd situation may arise in the course of mobilisa- tion for a social movement. However, the study of crowd as a spe- cific field of inquiry in India remains largely a neglected area. Ihave made reference to the contributions of scholars on crowd studies av relevant places in the book (see pages 90-91, 106, 140-41). It may be pointed out that our main interest in this book is confined to those types of conflicts that lead to relatively organised conflictual collective actions, especially social movements. Relevant discussion on this issue can be found in appropriate sections of this book (see pages 119-22). From the study of conflictual collective action I, therefore, exclude a vast range of incidences of individual conflicts. Second, [also exclude an equally vast range of dispersed, incidental, unstructured, and unorganised conflicts between two or more col. lectivities: caste, class, community, gender groups and the state. The type of conflicts we are interested in is generally those that lead to conflictual collective actions which have a group base and generally manifest more in a society with a social structure defined by hierar~ chy, harsh social inequality and social injustice. Deprivation and denial of one group (or individual) due to domination by another, especially in the setting of the contemporary democratic society, tends t6 lead to conflictual collective action, It may be emphasised that collective conflicts generally express non-institutionalised forms of social actions. ‘The contemporary theme of collective action has been at the core of a tradition of study of ‘collective behaviour’ in social sciences (see, Blumer, 1957; Turner and Killian 1957; Smelser 1962). The phrase, ‘collective behaviour’ does not refer to ‘a uniform, clearly defined class of phenomenon’, observes Smelser. He shows how roughly the same range of data have been symbolised by such terms as ‘mass behaviour’, ‘collective dynamics’ or ‘mass phenomenon’ (1962: 2). Collective conflicts may assume various forms of non- institutionalised actions ranging from organised but non-violent and passive collective resistance such as dhamas (sit-ins), boycotts, hares (strikes), picketing and peaceful slogan shouting protest marches to active and violent collective outbursts of people such as,32 Scclal movements, old and New those seen in the cases of riot, rebellion, revolt, revolution and sometimes even in social movements. Depending on the way the actors (of a collectivity) make assessments and attach importance to the perceived issues, goals and values, and depending on the level of organisation the collectivity is able to develop, the form of con- flicual (collective) action may be small or large in scope and cover- age, of short or long duration, and in terms of participation and involvement of people, ofa limited and localised or of a broad and ‘widespread nature, It may be noted that there ean also be forms of non-instittionalised yet non-conflictual collective actions. The formation of voluntary collective action groups to rescue victims of unexpected dizasters such as floods, epidemics or earchquakes, are ready examples. The emergence of such action groups in the defence of fellow beings is non-conflictual action. However, if such purely homophlic collective actions are challenged, questioned and opposed by some other group, the non-instituionalised, non- conflictual collective actions would be transformed into. cote lective actions. The types of collective action we are interest e +e this book, peers rata concept of social conflict and to the conceptions of non-institutionalised conf colesive actions. I will briefly deal with Smelser’s general classification of events re- feat a eee (value-oriented and norm-oriented) movement’ (Smelser 1962: 2). Let me briefly describe some forms of conflictual collective action relevant to the theme of this book and analyse their interlinkages. Riot, Rebellion, Revolt, Revolution and, Social, Movements The forms of collective action such as riot, revolt and evolution involve violent group outbursts. A riot has been defined as ‘an out- break of temporary but violent mass disorder’ (Smellie 1948: 386) Itbreaks out suddenly, carries fire and fury against the target group and dies out ir. a short period leaving behind death and devastation. The reportingin The Delhi Riots: Three Days in the Life of a Nation (Chakravarty and Haksar 1987) isan example of the morbid expres- sions of riots in society. According to Smellie, riots do not involve ‘Social Movements: Generte Perspective 33 an intention or attempt ‘to overthrow the government itself (Smellie 1948: 386). Riots are the index of general unrest in society. Gary T. Marx definesa riotas ‘relatively spontaneous group violence con- trary to traditional norms’ (1972: 50), It may be noted that hostile collective outbursts such as riots and revolt may lead toa large-scale ‘sustained social movement. This volume (see pp. 90-93) contains references to the role of crowds and rioting groups in 18th and 19th century France and Britain (Rude 1964; Tilly et al. 1975; E.P, Thompson 1981). Unlike crowd action, riots are always violent. Riots may break out over religious, sectarian, communal, econo- tic, political or racial issues (for details, see Smelser 1962: 229). In India, most of tke reporting is on communal riots (suchas Engineer 19824; S.K. Ghosh 1987; Akbar 1988; Saxena 1990; $. Das 1993). It may be noted that a crowd and rioting collectivity often tend to merge with each other giving rise toa ‘riot crowed”. Tambiah’s Level ing Crowds: Etlnonationalist Conflicts and Collective Violence in South Asia (1997) is perhaps the only study on the behaviour of ethnic riots and violent crowd behaviour in Sri Lanka, India and Pakistan. Scholars have used different systems of classifying violent forms ofcollective action. In Neil Smelser’s scheme of analysing collective behaviour, riots belong to the category of collective action which he refers to.asa ‘hostile outburst’ and social movement is referred to as ‘collective movement’ (1962: 3). The phenomenon of hostile out- burst is defined by him as ‘mobilisation for action under a hostile belief (ibid: 226). “The primary differences among terms such as “riot”, “revolt”, “rebellion”, “insurrection” and “revohition”—all of which involve hostile outbursts—stem from the scope of their ass0- ciated social movement’ (ibid.: 227). Ted R. Gurr puts the different forms of hostile outburst in the broad category of data on ‘political violence’. He defines political violence as referring to all collective attacks within a political community against the Political regime, its actors—including competing politcal groups as well as incumbents—or its policies. The concept represents a set of events, a common property of which is the actual or threat- ‘ened use of violence, but the explanation is not limited to that34 soclal Movements, old and New ry. Theconcept subsumes revolution, ordinarily defined as Fandamenal sociopolieal change secomplshed through vio, lence. It also includes guerilla wars, coups d'etat, rebellions an riots (Gurr 1970: 3-4). Gurr classifies ‘political violence’ into the following three catego- ries: + Tuumoil: ‘Relatively spontaneous, unorganized political vio~ lence with substantial popular participation, including violent fated hes, ts, polical clashes, and localized rebellion. + Conspiracy: ‘Highly organized poltial violence with imited participation, including organized political assassination, small- scale terrorism, small-scale guerrilla wars, coups d'etat, and aly opted pbte ener spread popular participation, designed to over-throw the re- gime or dissolve the state and accompanied by extensive vio, lence, including large-scale terrorism and guerrilla wars, an revolutions’ (jbid.: 11). the above system of classification, the phenomenon of riot, ‘Rate and abalion fall into the category of turmai Revolution belongs to the category of ‘internal war’. These types of collective actions differ from each other in terms of their aims and objectives, the magnitude of people’s opposition to authority, and their ee ‘on society. While the conception of revolution may encores 1 incidences of revolt and rebellion, it is not reducible to revolt and re- bellion. It may be made clear that the term ‘revolt refers to the aS ised act of rising against or breaking away from the establishe system of authori: Revol isthe base qualifying conon for con- cepts such as rebellion and revolution’ (L. Roger, 1948: BU) 1e concept of revolution refers xo the patcipaton of ll sections of 05 ciety through the whole sersitory of the satin the overthrow and replacement ofthe pliteal order by a new one (es, Meusl 1948: 367; Schuman 1948: 116-18; Johnson 1968: 1-8 and Gurr 1970: D: ‘While revolution signifies the revolt of all sections of sociery an their participation in the coral dismantling of the state, ‘rebellion is ‘Social Movements: A Gener perspecthre 35 more frequently confined to the efforts on the part of a portion of a state to throw off the authority’ (Schuman 1948: 116), In this sense rebellion refers to rejection of and revolt against the political authority. But to the extent that the rebellious forms of collective action signify the rejection of political authority by a part or seg- ment of society, its scope and impact remain relatively limited com- pared to revolution. The basic significance of revolution lies not so ‘much in the use of violent means to bring about profound modifica tion of social organisation, as in its ability to effect a ‘major shift in the relations between the classes” (Muesel 1948: 368). Revolution, in this sense, would mean a total recasting of society. Since violation of authority is the common factor in rebellion, revolt and revolu- tion, let us understand the meaning of authority. According to Chalmers Johnson, ‘Authority is a complementary relationship, bestowing rights and obligations on those who obey and also on those who command’ (1968: 114). Authority is legitimate power. But if the system of political authority—the state and its apparatus of governance—tecomes incapable of protecting the life and prop~ erty of people, if it becomes unjust and tyranniczl, rebellion and revolt remain the only method to restore and preserve society. Ana~ lysing the theory of rebellion and revolution (ibid.: 113-14), Johnson cites John Locke's definition of rebellion: ‘Rebellion being an oppo- sition, not to persons, but to authority which is founded only in the constitutions and laws of the government, those, whoever they be, who by force breck through, and by force justify their violation of them, are truly and properly rebels (ibid: 115). After having marked the critical conceptual boundaries of differ- ent forms of conflictual collective actions—riot, rebellion and revo- lution—let us now relate them to the concept of social movement. Scholars such as Gupta (1982: 3-7) who while defining social move- ment have attempted to separate its conceptual meaning from trends, tendencies. riots, public opinion, crowd, etc. Our discussion ‘Would be confined to riot, rebellion, revolution and social move- ment alone. It would be brief and of a clatficatory nature, At the ‘outset, we need to understand that while all types of social move- ments are collective actions, all forms of collective actions are not social movements. ‘Collective movement’, writes Smelser ‘would refer to collective efforts wo mudily norms and values, which36 Seclal Movements, old and New frequently (but not always) develop over longer period of time! (Smeser 1962: 3). Smelser’s conception of ‘norm-orened! and ‘value-oriented’ movements subsume within them the concepts of revolution (ibid: 313, 319) and other forms of ‘hostile outburst (ibid.: 271-72). 1 am unable to agree with Smelser on this count, Social movement may lead to or transform itself into revolution. When it docs transform itself into revolution, it ceases to be a movement. It becomes another form of collective action. There is no linear path ‘from mobilisation to revolution’ as suggested by C. Tilly (1978) and questioned by Alain Touraine (1585: 754-5). ‘Making use of Bonnel’s (1983) historical data about the frequent butindependent labour movements a Russia tee ie 4,Touraine tarates the concept of movement from revolution. He says, ‘ev- a or fe caiectG anew ocd etss el to destroy the social movement it is based on. Saturn ate his children, revolutions eat their father’ (1985: 762). This is closer to our understanding of movement and revolution. While it is true that revolution, rebellion, ots and soil movement are manifestations of son-intesonal -ctive action, they are however, not isomorphic. beret ae ‘may or may not be mobilisation against the state and the system of governance, and may or may not involve armed uprising and the use of violence. Riot, rebellion and revolu- tion, on the other hand, do. It is important to note that while revo- lution refers to the total recasting of the economic, social and polial order by introducing fundamental changes inthe structure of society, social movements generally mobilise the members (the participants) to seek redressal of a grievance or to struggle for spe- cific goals and objectives. Further, to the extent that social movements frequently involve only a section of population in the mobilisation against the adversary—be it the state, an institution or another sec- tion of society—and manifest themselves only in a part of society, they become closer to riot and rebellion. Unlike movements, how- ever, riot and rebellion necessarily involve been peas td necessarily violent and unlike movement, riot and rebellion, it invol- ves all eeisat ofl society living in its territory. They also vary by structure, organisation and duration, Crowd and riot are relatively unstructured and shortlived. Rebellion, revolution and eon are comparatively more structured. All of them carry a conflictual ‘Social Movements: 4 Generte Perspective 37 core. Movement would refer to a sustained and continuous collective action over a long period of time, the other two exhibit a relative suddeness (not necessarily) accompanied by explosive violence. Social movements are characterised by the presence of an ideology shared by the participants, a strategy employed to achieve the objec- tives, an organisational structure witha clear system of leadership and communication, an adversary, mobilisation against the adversary and finally, the impact they have on the society. It may be noted that a movement, in the course of its mobilisation can become vio- lent, may express elements of riot and rebellion. Our point is that the essential details of a movement cannot be reduced to those of either riot or rebellion. We need to recognise that movements gener~ ally manifest themselves more in an open society defined by demo- cratic traditiors. Revolutionary society abolishes democracy, robs people of theirliberty and personal freedom, chokes the channels of free communication and in the end, i loses in upon itself asa regi- mented society, abolishing all possibility of the emergence of social ™ovements, Revolution thus marks the end of social movement. Soclal Movement and, Social. change Reading social movement literature suggests that there isa need to define an analytical separation between the conceptions of social change and social movement. There seems to be an agreement among scholars of socal movements that the data of social movement and collective socia action are equally the data of social change. How- ever, such an agreement does not help in separating the foci and the specificity of the concept of social movement from that of social change. In the study of human biology, beyond a certain point of understanding, it does not help to state that humans are mammals ‘Theres, cherefore, a general need to apply the logic of classification of social reality to introduce an analytical separation between the two conceptions, seen widely occurring together in the texts of social movemert and social change studies. The application of the classifcatory principles of resemblance and diffrence is used to de- lineate an analytical separation between the two concepts. Closely following my earlier attempt (R. Singh 1995: 24748), some of the separating grounds can be made more explicit. We propose a four-38. social Movements, old and New point thesis about the differences between social movement and social change. 1. The idea of social change is an overarching, ubiquitous and all- embracing condition of social realty. The notion of a ‘non- changing’, ‘static’ and ‘repetitive’ society and culture is not a valid one. All social realities, irrespective of their time and place, ae subject to change. The concepts of social movement and collective social action, on the other hand, are not over arching phenomena of society. In our perspective, whereas the existence of a critical core or conflictual conditions in social structure can be given recognition of a universal nature, their outburst in the behaviour of a collectivity in the form of movement is not universal. The distinction between the latent and manifest movement is crucial to analysing the relative ‘meaning of the conception of movement and change. 2. The manifestation, maturation, routinisation, and even the failure and death of a social movement can be described and portrayed the way one describes and portrays a biography of a life. Unlike the concept of social change, movements and col- lective actions have a clear and specific historical individuality in society. No wonder that social movements can be seen as having a ‘career’, a life span. They have a historical beginning, and either suffer a premature death or dissolve into the con- ception of social change. They have their own conception of social change. Social movements have their distinctive temper- ament. A movement could be for peace, but it can transform itself into revolutionary violence. Social change, on the other hand, cannot be described with the same confidence and the same ease within the temporal limits of a ‘biography’ or of a “career”, Like the concept of time, social change is an ontologi- cal continuum, 3, Social change may or may not be the expression of a wilful, deliberate and conscious struggle and strife of human volunta- rism, of organised collective activism to reject some part of a social order or to protect a social order, or further, to alter ‘a social order and to create a better social order. Most social ‘movements express and signify a relatively dense and concen- Seclal Movements: A Geneve perspective 3 trated cascade of aspirations and activism of a relatively organ- ised collectivity. Social movements refer to organised asser- tions of human groups for or against some values, norms or social practices, including the practices of the system of power and authority of a time. Social change may not contain such voluntaristic organisational character of human activism. 4. Finally, unlike the conception of social change, especially in its functionalist orientation, all social movements are defined by the predominance of a critical core, conflictual content and social contradictions. The structure of a movement invariably rests on some form of conflict. It is characterised by an awak- ened collective consciousness of people about some values, norms and social practices prevalent in a society of a particular period which are found unjust, oppressive and unacceptable to a group. Social movements refer to a natural social technique, often resorted to oppose and eject stutons of injustice and ‘oppression. Social actions and movements are purposive social acts with defisite goals, methods and procedures of organisa- tion and communication. What separates the foci of move- ‘ments from the foci of social changes is that the former is always, and invariably either negating or promoting some spe- cific social objectives. Social changes, on the other hand, may not carry an element of conscious negation or promotion of some specific type of goal or objective. They could be imma- nent processes of society. This four-point schema designed for the separation of the concepts of movement and change is analytical in nature. At the empirical level, these two concepts have a strong tendency to overlap. How- ver, the purpose behind such a separation isto articulate and high- light the need for separating the domain of social movement studies from the general study of social change in sociology. Our exercise in introducing a distinction between the relatively autonomous fields of social movement and social change makes the former more visi- ble. The visibility of movement as a field of study helps us in identi- fying and studying its normal-type character which movements reflect as a specific form of social data.40. Soclab movements, old. and New Normal, Social Movements “The search for a perspective on the study of social movements, despite its tentativeness, does yield a set of broadly generalised and relatively consistent ‘normal-type’ characteristics of social move- ments. Some of them are briefly identified below, UNIVERSALISM OF SOCIAL MOVEMENTS ‘The conception of a social movement is linked with the conception of society: The two conceptions are the faces of the same realty. Since movement resides in and rises from the conflictual core of soit axontly llowe dh he uve of soci re supposes the universal existence of social movement, articulating the clans and soattatisions of people in sbclerg While che arent foundational aspects (critical-conflictual aspects) of social move- ments have a higher degree of constancy, the behavioural manifesta- tions of movements are subject to the contingent condition of society. The role of ideology, leadership, strategy, communication and mobilizations, etc., may constitute the contingent aspects of RELATIVISM IN SOCIAL MOVEMENTS While most societies, pre-modern and modern, contain a critical conflictual core, and while the potential presence of social move- ‘ment is universal, the nature, form, pattern, direction and focus of social movements vary by culture, place and time. The quest for freedom may become the central issue for the struggle of a collec- tivity in one society, in one period; the same quest may emerge in another society in another period. Issues and strategies of move- ‘ments are relative to societies and to their history. Further, the central social conflict-content of movements may assume different masks and guises. Economic issues may express. themselves in one period in one society in the form of a seemingly religious or separatist movement; the same, at another time and in another society, may assume the form of an autonomy and sub- nationalist ethnic movement. Social movements are usually specific to culture, history and social structure. ‘Soclal Movements: 4 generle perspecthre 44 THE IDEA OF SOCIAL OPTIMISM IN SOCIAL MOVEMENTS Social movements invariably involve the projection of an aspira- tional map and a working design of a desirable future. This they do, either by rejecting or altering the past and present forms of norms and values of the society or supplanting values from the past and transposing them in the imagined structure of the future society. Social movements epitomise in this respect, the clustering and coales, cence of the collective aspirations, hopes and desires of a people, of srOups or subgroups ofa society. The role of ideology or utopia in the establishment of a ‘better’ world and better life and human indulgence in acting to bring paradise on earth constitutes the sig- nifigant aspect of movement. Social movements, by definition, reject the idea of a fixed and unchanging conception of seats and sites of values, norms, power and hierarchy in society. The social World ceases to be preordained. People ae entitled to effect change and to reshape the structure of society. At this evel of conceprualis- ing movements, the idea of collective action as the creative agent of history, acting for the goals and objectives of the human, vends to be characterised by purpose, hope and human optimism. Social move. ments are therefore, positive data of humans in society. SOCIAL RENEWAL, SELF-ACTUALISATION AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS Social movements permit for and mirror the society’s methods and strategies for self-renewal and self-regencration through collective action. Movements generally provide a safety valve enabling society 10 escape the pressure and weight of che staticty of vested interests, the inertia due to the status quo of inequality, oppression, and sub, ordination of one by another. For, its not only a question of actual ising the material values in everyday life, but also of self-esteem, dignity and the freedom to think and feel. Movements, defined by the general processes of awakened questioning and claiming, stake ing and challenging che privileged inertia ofa society and ofits pri leged groups, the state and the authority system, lead to reproduction and renewal of society.42, socal movements, old. and New In fact, social moveménts are both the cradle and the context of, the production and reproduction of society, and they mark the course of social progress and human evolution. Social movements free men and women from the determinism of ideology and reli- gion, help them see themselves as a system of agency and action, capable of producing, accepting, rejecting and altering the estab- lished order of ideas and system of relations. Here social movement appears as a means as well as an end of society, in other words, soci- ety itself, ‘Social movements always carry self-actualising contents. And these contents are not of the nature which could either be summed up in an ideology or in the form of a utopia. Some conceptions of con- temporary ideology and utopia will be discussed in this book at appropriate places. At present, it is necessary that we examine the changing social bases of the emerging movements and the way these movements have an impact upon the contemporary representation of society and the theoretical structure ofthe discipline of sociology. 3 The changing Representation of Soctety and Movements: From Modernity to Post-modernity, Society to Post-society and. Soctoloqy to Post-socioloqy ‘What is the nature of the linkage between the emerging conception of social movement and the changing representation of contempo- rary society? A reflexive understanding of the tie between the two analytical entities, society and movement, is key to the study of contemporary social movements. Such an inquiry, it is hoped, would not only take us closer to an understanding of the emerging nature of social movements, but would also help us comprehend the ‘ways social movements act upon and mould the forms and repre- sentations of society itself ‘The theoretical transformation of the conception of movement is generally linked with the transforming representation of society. A movement from industrial to post-industrial, modern to post- modem society (see Touraine 1984a: 38-39, 1987: 208-9), and as we intend to articulate, from the conception of society to post-society, has a major bearing on the nature and form of the emerging social movements, In order to introduce clarity into the discussion on the nature and types of movements, it would be helpful if we first present some conceptual clarifications to assign meaning to theH+ social Movements, old and New operative conceptual phrases such as ‘representation of society’, ‘post-modern’, ‘post-industrial’, ‘post-society’ and ‘post-sociology’ which we use in the book. Such specification of meaning is essential as these conceptual phrases portray the social transformational background of the social movement concept. We briefly elucidate them one by one below. Representation of Soctety and, Social, Movements ‘The phrase ‘representation of society’ is an expansive and ideal- typical conception that helps conceptualise society as something. more than a mere ‘system of relationships’. French social scientists generally use the term ‘representation’. The Durkheimian concep- tion of ‘collective representation’ (Durkheim 1961: 482), the Althusserian notion of ideology as a system of ‘representation’ (Barrett 1991: 83) and Alain Touraine’s frequent use of phrases such as ‘cultural repre- sentation’ (1992: 126) and ‘representation of social’ life (1984a: 37) are examples of the ways in which this phrase has been usec In this book, we use the phrase ‘representation of society" to sig- nify the cotlity of human expressions, and the subjective and objec- tive conditioning of the ways in which people live out their everyday life in the setting of interpersonal relationships. This working defi- nition of the ‘representation’ of social life includes within the do- meaning the system of people’s ideologies, ideas and concepts; their myths; legends and history; their conception of the past, present and future; their defeats, successes, aspirations and struggles. ‘The phrase, ‘representation of society” is thus designed to restore the active humans to their place in the transforming conception of society. In the representational perspective, the human is seen as the bearer of the otal being. He is not an abstracted part of a collectivity which appropriates his everyday ‘relations’ in the project of building an abstract and reified humanless conception of human society. The conception of the ‘representation of society” therefore, helps pres- ent the total conception of society in its various forms of expres- sions. Conventional sociology had banished the human from the concept of society by concealing the empirical image of men and women as total beings who are the makers of society. ‘The changing representation of Socleey and Movements 45 ‘The social movement perspective on society, therefore, tends to be representationa! in orientation, for it accords agency and action to human beings, an ability central to the conception of social movements. And further, it reverses the equation: ‘society shapes ‘humans’, to ‘humans shape society’. The human being is seen as the active producer of society first, and as the product of society later. The phrase ‘representation of sociery’, in this respect, isto be taken torefer toa specific theoretic shift in the conception of sociology as. a discipline and also in sociology’s conception of society. The basic clement, which radically marks this shife is that human beings are provided with cheir residency in society of which they themselves ae the builders. Obviously, such a conception of society negates the Althusserian notion of the ideological predetermination of the human in society which symbolises nothing but ‘order and repres- sion, manipulation and exclusion’ (Touraine 1984b: 36). The surfacing of submerged identities and human voluntarism ‘cutting across the confines of classes, boundaries of state and polity and communicational barriers around issues such as gender, ecol- ogy, and civic liberty, on the one hand, the contemporary individ- wal’s search for roots in tradition, language and culture, on the other, and most importantly, the shaping of a fundamentalist con- ception of religion and communal bonds, in some societies, bonds of an aggressive association with some and convulsive dissociation and exclusion of others, are some of the dramatic phenomena of a new representation of the contemporary society. The nature of the relationship between the contemporary representation of society and movements and the conception of post-modernity and the post-industrial system, is to be analysed and highlighted. We pres- ent next the relevant outline of our analysis. Modernity, post-modernity and Movements CONCEPT OF MODERNITY The conception of the post-modern society is an unintended out- come of the storm centres of modernity, and as a relative notion, it is centrally located in the crisis of conventional sociology’s evolu- tionary view of society and social life. The phrase ‘conventional46 Seclal.Movements, old and New ‘ology’ should include both classical fursctionalism as well as dia- Iecieal Maraism. Three differen, though interrelated, ideal-typical conceptions characterising the idea of modernity can be identified. First, modernity refers to a passage in time (ie. historicity) involv- ing the transformation of the quality and forms of social life. It introduces a notion of movement and change from community to society, from a simple to a complex structure, from fused to differ- ree cal ain gels to an open and mobile system, from particularism to universalism, ace eer oe ree eee ar jally Touraine 1984a: 34, 1987: 207 and Jencks 1986). From feet idustrialism and tech- the modernist’s point of view, capitalism, industrialism an nology heighten the rate of exchange of commodities. Fast commu nication and the dominance of market relations overall other relations of everyday life reveal some of the economic expressions of this modernity. . ‘As a passage, modernity’s evolutionary content is exemplified by four ieneneled axioms Cohetited by-Mad"Fiberg aa Bier Hettne (1985). 1. Direction: The general change of history is directed and cumu- lative, and it can be described as a process of growth and ex- pansion with respect to some particular linear dimensions of 2, Decsesaians The eeludonary procon ix predevrmined and is irreversible. It is not possible for mankind to influence the course of history except for minor peripheral details. Conse quently, the ability of human beings to alter their path in his- tory stands negated. : fi 3. Progress: Modernity as an evolutionary concept implies the notion of progress in the normative sense of the word. Tc suggests a message that societies are moving towards a better world. 4. nmanence: The evolutionary proces is immanent realy in every society. It does not require external intervention. ‘The notion of immanence inplics the Hea of selfevluiog (ibid: 210) s acone res the two central social thoughts Modernisation as a concept recaptus oven tocety, namely evolutionism aod development. The The changing Representation of Sockety and. Movements 47 idea of stages in development, of structural differentiation and functional specialisation, and of development as a process, produce an image of modernity as a couse, a track in history, referring to the Passage of the movements of society in time. While the first ideal-typical characteristic of modernity treated it as a passage in time, the second treats modernity as a huge and Bigantic state-sponsored project to wilfully alter and transform the nature of civil society according to its own design and in its own interests. The lore of the welfare state and policy and planning, of development, reform and social intervention have generally emerged 45 state-produced and state-owned ideological apparatuses. These are meant to fashion individuals’ relations in the shape in which the Sate, representing che coercive and power aspect of society, espe- cially of its ruling classes, wish them to be. The lore of development involves a linkage between power and knowledge. Zygmunt Bau- tan; nis Legislators and Interpreters: On Modernity, Post- Modernity and Intellectual, (1989) identifies the power-knowledge syndrome of modemity which began with the emergence of a new type of state power with resources and will necessary to shape and administer the social system according to a precon- ceived model of order; and the establishment of a relatively autonomous, self-managing discourse able to generate such a model complete with the practices its implementation required (ii Who is to propound and further the discourse required for the completion of the preconceived model of society? The intellectuals. But not the ‘autonomous’ and ‘self-managing’ intellectuals, as Zyg- munt Bauman says, Instead, it is generally the dependent and mostly the hegemonic class of intellectuals, including the disci- Plines and professions that join in the project of modernisation with the contemporary state apparatuses. It is a matter of interest to note that the premodern hase of society witnessed some degree of sepa- ration between state power and the intellectual activities of the knowledgeable. The most conspicuous and dramatic phenomenon ‘of our time is that modernity fuses them. together. And in this fusion, the state and the academics join together to work out an