M 1 (b) 1 an Introduction to Social Movements - At

An Introduction to the Study of Social Movements
Author(s): ALAIN TOURAINE

Source: Social Research, Vol. 52, No. 4, Social Movements (WINTER 1985), pp. 749-787
Published by: The New School
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40970397 .
Accessed: 09/12/2014 14:10
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
The New School is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Social Research.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 148.206.159.132 on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 14:10:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
An Introductionto
the Study of
Social /
Movements / byALAIN TOURAINE
A he notionof social movement,li e most notionsin the

social sciences,does not describepart of reality but is an
elementof a specificmode of constructinsocialreality.Too
manystudiesof socialmovements are dan erouslynaive.Too
often,authors, whilethey thin theyare describin collective
actionsor historicalevents,e pressverycrudelytheirown
opinionsor ideolo ies.The limitedvalue of moststudiesof
socialmovements becomeseven moreconspicuousif we com-
pare different periodsof intellectual
and socialhistory.Social
movementsin the postwarperiod were mainlyconsideredas
disruptiveforces even liberals li e L. oser1werereadyat
bestto rantthatconflicts can be functional forsocialinte ra-
tion.Afterthesi ties,socialmovements, on thecontrary, were
identified withthecounterculture, thesearchfor alternative
formsof social and culturallife. In the early ei hties,the
sub ectmatterloses round. ow is itpossibleto overcomethe
obviouspre udiceswhichso oftenma e discussionsabout so-
cial movementsuselessbecause theyinformus mainlyabout
social opinionsof some limitedsectorsof academia
To overcomethisnaive and illusorypositivism, each social
scientistmustma eclear the meanin of thewordshe or she
uses, situatin themin a more eneralintellectualframeof
reference. ut to e plain whatI thin is not enou h: it is
1 L. oser, The unctionsof Social onflict( lencoe, 111.: ree Press, 195 ).
SO IAL RESEAR , Vol. 52, No. 4 (Winter 1985)

750 SO IAL RESEAR
indispensableto compare one s own cate orieswith other

typesof construction of social reality.The aim here is not to
separate and define various Weltanschauun en but, on the
to
contrary, inte rate various approaches intoa eneralrepre-
sentationof sociallifewhich ivessome amountof autonomy
to each approach.It is truethatsuchan inte ratedand diver-
sifiedview is itselfrelated to specific theories and is not
entirely ob ective.The problem,however,is not to pursuean
abstractpureob ectivity butto pushbac thelimitsof ideolo y
and to ma e discussionsamon social scientists more mean-
in ful. If we eschew thiscritical of
self-appraisal our ideas and
results, we fallintopretentious and uselesse pressionsof our
personalor nationalpreferencesand representations.
Manystaysin different partsof the worldhave convinced
me of the necessityto build an internationally transferable
nowled e whichcannot be identifiedwith cate oriesused by
the actorsthemselvesin any partof the world.The timehas
one when ideas correspondin to importantsectorsof ad-
vanced countrieswereable to spread all over the worldand
to be transmitted by dependentor imitativesocial scientists.
or thesereasons,and to help eliminatesuperficialcriti ues
and artificialdiscussions,I willtryto identifywhatI mean by
social movement and to relate it to a broader frameof
referencewhichshould at the same time providespace for
othernotionsand otherapproaches.
TypesofSocial onflicts
There is an almost enerala reementthatsocialmovements

shouldbe conceivedas a specialtypeof socialconflict.Many
typesof collectivebehaviorare not social conflicts:panics,
cra es,fashions,currentsof opinion,culturalinnovationsare
not conflicts,even if theydefinein a preciseway whatthey
react to. A conflictpresupposesa clear definitionof oppo-
nentsor competitinactorsand oftheresourcestheyare fi ht-

T E STU O SO IAL MOVEMENTS 751
in foror ne otiatin to ta econtrolof. Such an elementary

definition leavesthe wayopen to manydifferent approaches,
butitalreadydrawstwolimitswhichshouldnotbe trespassed.
A socialconflictcannotbe analy edentirelyas a featureof a
socialsystem.If a societyfeelsthreatenedor even no lon er
wantsto survive - some e ampleshave been describedin Af-
ricain particular- the manifestation of thissocietalcrisiscan-
notbe analy edas a socialconflict.The a entsof thisconflict
mustbe identifiedas specificsocial cate ories.On the other
side, if a collectiveactor cannot define its oals in social
terms - if for e ample a roup wants its specificity to be
reco ni ed - its stru lefor freedomor identitycannot by
itselfcreatea socialconflict.Even whentheconflictis veryfar
frombein a ero-sum ame,it mustbe definedby a field,
thatis, by sta es whichare valued and desiredby two or
moreopponents.So all indsof socialconflicts have in com-
mon a referenceto real - thatis, or ani ed - actorsand to
ends which are valued by all competitorsor adversaries.
Withinthisbroaddefinition, it is necessaryto separatevarious
indsof social conflicts.
(1) A firstand easilyperceivedcate oryof socialconflictis
thecompetitive pursuitofcollective In itsmoste treme
interests.
it
form, opposes individuals
or roups who wantto ma imi e
theiradvanta eson a mar et.In a moreclassicalsociolo ical
tradition,it is defined as the e pressionof a relationship
betweenactors inputsand outputsin an or ani ation, or of
theirrelativedeprivation.If employeesof a companybrin
hi h or low inputs(measuredby s ill,for e ample) and re-
ceive hi hor low rewards(in termsof incomein particular),
the hypothesishas been elaboratedthatfour main typesof
behaviorwillappear. The hi hestprobability of conflict
e ists
when low rewardscorrespondto hi h inputs. When both
inputand outputare hi h,competition willreplace rievance.
On the contrary,a low input associatedwithlow rewardis
li elyto producewithdrawal, and a low inputwhichreceives
hi hrewardsleads to passiveconformity. The actorshere are

752 SO IAL RESEAR
defined by their positions on a hierarchical scale, and the

sta es of the conflictsare or ani ational rewards. This ra-
tionalist view of collective behavior has been well presented
by A. Obserschall.2
(2) oth similar and opposed to the firsttype is the recon-
struction of a social,cultural,or politicalidentity. ere the oppo-
nent is defined more as a forei ner or invader than as an
upper class, a power elite, or mana ement. The actor defines
himselfas a communitywhose values are threatenedby inva-
sion or destruction.Messianic movementsin ra il at the time
of abolition of slavery,for e ample, e pressed firstof all the
defense of rural communitiesa ainst the domination of trade
and urban interests. . Tilly, analy in the Vendean counter-
revolutionarymovement in rance, instead of interpretin it
as an aristocraticreaction, sees in it the communitarian de-
fense of a rural societywhich is threatenedby a risin urban
bour eoisie.
urin recent years, many stri es have e pressed, in de-
clinin industries, or in sectors which are upset by new
technolo ies,the resistance of occupational roups. This sec-
ond type of conflictcan be called defensive, while the first
one- the pursuitof collectiveinterests - is offensive.Smelser s
idea that collective behavior corresponds to the crisis of an
element of the social systemand effortsto reconstructit fits
with the definitionof the second type of social conflict.4The
hica o school has analy ed an s and hettos as forms of
defense of dominated social and ethnic roups.
These two typesof conflictbehavior are located at the same
level: they respond to an or ani ationalstatusand to or ani-
ational chan e. Their analysis is enerally made in terms of
system more than in terms of actors. ut they are opposed
in most ways to each other. The firstone can be called instru-
mental,the second e pressive. oth can easily driftout of the
2 A. Oberschall, Social
onflictand Social Movements(En lewood liffs, N. .:
Prentice- all, 197 ).
. Tilly, La Vend e:R volutionet contre-r volution
(Paris: ayard, 1970).
4 N. Smelser,
Theoryof ollective ehavior(New or : Macmillan, 19 ).

limitsof definition of socialconflict. If thefirstone is reduced

to rationalbehavior,it stopsreferrinitselfto a socialconflict
becausetheenvironment is describedin nonrelational, purely
competitive terms,and actorsin competition have no common
cultural or social orientatione cept their own interests.
Sociolo yhas constantly remindedus that omosociusis not
a
ust variety o omo oeconomicus. If thesecondone is reduced
to a propheticdefenseof values and communities, it e ually
stopsreferrin to a social conflict because it opposes culture
and barbarism, ood and Evil,in a purelymilitary waywhich
e cludesthedefinition of any indof referenceof bothcamps
to commonvalues.
( ) A politicalforceaims at chan in the rulesof the ame,
not ust the distribution of relativeadvanta esin a iven
or ani ation. In this case, the definition of the actorsand of
the sta es of theirconflictseems easy, because either the
conflictis stron lyor ani edor it has a reat capacityfor
mobili ation. In bothcases,each campclearlydefinesitself,its
opponent,and theaspectof thedecision-ma inprocessor of
therulesof the amewhichshouldbe chan edor maintained.
Most studiesof industrialrelationsreferthemselves,often
to suchan ima eof socialconflict.
e plicitly, The sociolo yof
has
or ani ations analy ed in an even broader waytheefforts
of variouscate oriesor individualsto controlwhatM. ro ier
calls ones of uncertaintyand act accordin to whatMarch
and Simonhave labeled limitedrationality. These 5 authors
amon othershave demonstratedthat manyconflictswhich
were considered or ani ational are in fact political.
Studyin stri es, E. Shorterand . Tillyfollowthe same line:
insteadof considerin stri esas responsesto relativedepri-
vation, they observe that they are closelyconnectedwith
sharp pro ressesor declines in the politicalinfluenceof
unions.
5 . . March and . Simon, Or ani ations(New or : Wiley, 1958).

E. Shorter and . Tilly, Stri esin rance, 19 0-19 8 ( ambrid e: ambrid e
UniversityPress, 1974).

754 SO IAL RESEAR
(4) In the same way,as the defenseof an identityis the

oppositeside,thene ativee uivalent,of thecollectivepursuit
of interest,the defenseof a statusor privile esis the ne ative
e uivalentof a politicalpressure.P. Schmitter, followin an
idea introducedby . Lin , has demonstrated the importance
in Europe and in Latin Americaof neocorporatist policies
whichappear whenan interest roupis incorporatedintothe
State in which it defends its interestsby emphasi in its
functionalimportance, itsusefulnessfornationallife.7 arm-
ers or teachers,insteadof defendin theirincome directly,
proclaimthat a hi h priorityshould be reco ni edfor a -
ricultureor education.At a broaderlevel,politicalmovements
can e pressthe fearof crisisand a call to a nationalinte ra-
tion whichdefendsmoral or communitarian values and de-
nounces dan erous minorities.Since the end of the nine-
teenthcenturyour politicaland intellectual lifehas been re-
peatedly influenced by the fearof a mass societywhichoften
the
e presses protection of norms and interestswhichcan no
lon erbe efficiently defendedbyusual institutional channels.
In Latin America,the factthatmanyimportanteconomic
decisionsare ta enby forei ncompaniesor the international
ban in and trade systementailsas anvindirect conse uence
thee tremeautonomyof thepoliticaland ideolo icalforcesin
relationto economicinterests.This mechansim,whichI call
disarticulation,wea ensrepresentative democracy.The re-
sultis thatpoliticalmovements are oftenorientedbya defen-
sive nationalismwhich ivesa priorityto the defenseof na-
tionalinte ration a ainstforei ninfluenceand duali ation
of the countryover the or ani ationof directlyconflictin
politicalparties.
(5) Abovethispolitical,institutional levelof analysis,e istsa
different type of socialconflict,whose sta eis thesocialcontrol
of themain cultural that
patterns, is, of the patternsthrou h
7 P. Schmitter,
orporatism and Policy-Ma in in ontemporary Western
Europe, omparativePoliticalStudies,April 1977, pp. 7- 8.

whichour relationships withtheenvironment are normatively

or ani ed. These culturalpatterns are of three main inds:a
of
modelof nowled e,a type investment, and ethicalprinci-
ples. These representations of truth,production, and morality
depend on thecapacityof achievement, of self-production,of
a ivensociety.Societyis opposed to community, because a
whichhas a hi hcapacityto act upon itselfand to
collectivity
transform dividedbetweenleadersor rul-
itselfis necessarily
in roups, which imposesavin s,deferred ratification pat-
terns,abstractideas, and moral principlesand at the same
timeidentifytheirown interestswiththeseuniversalprinci-
ples, and people or masses, whichare bothsubordinated
to thecontrolof culturalvaluesbyrulin roupsand ea er to
eliminatethisdominationand to identify themselves withthese
culturalvalues.This centralconflictis endlessand cannotbe
solved. If the masses win, theytransforman activesociety
into an immobile,reproductivecommunityif the elite im-
poses its identification withvalues, it transforms the self-
productionof society into privateinterestsand entrepre-
neurshipinto speculationor privile es.
( ) These lastremar sma eclearhow shortthedistanceis
betweenthis positive conflictbehaviorand the ne ative
ones whichcorresponddirectly to them. reation ofa neworder
is the oppositeof the conflict-loaded self-production of soci-
ety. The most e tremeform of such a critical action is
revolution,whichalwaysaims at recreatin a community, es-
tablishin a new socialorder,morerationalor morenational,
but definedby its inte rationand its capacityto eliminate
conflicts,a capacitywhich is rapidlydemonstratedby the
police. The rulin roup,in a parallelway,tendsto impose
orderas a precondition foreconomicdevelopment, but order
oftenbecomesan end in itselfand an instrument forprotect-
in privile es.The influenceof the renchand Russianrevo-
lutionshas lon imposedthe idea thata revolutionwas the
politicale pressionof a popular class movement.This con-
tinuityfromsocial mobili ationto revolution,whichis still

75 SO IAL RESEAR
acceptedby Tilly,has been efficiently critici edby historical

studies.WhileV. onnelldemonstrated thatthedevelopment
of labor movementin Russiabefore1914 was uite indepen-
dentof revolutionary political roups,8T. S ocpolemphasi ed
in an important boo thatrevolutions are notdirectresultsof
a socialupheavalbut mustbe e plainedfirstof all bya brea -
downof theStateand of thepoliticalsystem.9 Earlier, . uret
had critici edthe traditionalima eof the renchRevolution
and of its natural radicali ationfrom1789 to 1794.10This
ma ortransformation of politicalanalysisis obviouslya conse-
uence of the disenchantment withthe politicalre imeborn
fromthe 1917 revolution.
The si typesof conflictbehaviorwhichhave been rapidly
describedcorrespondon one side to three levels of social
life- or ani ationalprocesses,politicalinstitutions, and cul-
tural orientations- which cannot be separated from class
conflicts,and, on the other side, to two opposed and com-
plementarytypesof conflicts - offensiveand defensive.The
firsttypedistin uishes conflictinactorsand impliesa some-
whatautonomouse pressionof the sta esof thisconflictthe
secondtendsto identify an actorwithsocialand culturalvalues
and to e clude the opponentas an e ternalenemyor as a
traitor.
None of thesetypesshould be confusedwithotherswhich
are no lon erdefinedbya certainlevelof sociallifebutwhich
manifestconflictineffortsto controla processof historical
chan e,thatis, thepassa e fromone culturaland societaltype
to anotherone. In moreconcreteterms,we mustseparatethe
internalconflicts of an industrialsocietyfromconflicts which
are lin edto the processof industriali ation. This distinction
is stillsomewhatdifficult to acceptforWesterncountriesbe-
8 V. onnell, RootsofRebellion:Wor ersPoliticsand Or ani ations in St. Petersburand

Moscow,1900-1914 ( er eley: Universityof alifornia Press, 198 ).
9 T. A omparative Analysisof rance,Russia and
S ocpol, Statesand Social Revolutions:
hina ( ambrid e: ambrid e UniversityPress, 1979).
10 . uret, Penserla r volution fran aise(Paris: allimard, 1978).

cause theirspecifice perienceis thattheirown industriali a-

tionhas been mainlyendo enous,rootedin science,technol-
o y,education, achievementmotive, and the open mar et,
so thattheircentralima e of themselvesidentifiedfunction-
in and chan e, modernityand moderni ation.Modern
societieswere defined,fromthe Enli htenment on, by their
to
capacity destroy traditions, and
particularisms, reli ionsand
to open the way to Reason and its achievements.
ut aftera lon centuryof developmentpolicies--thatis,of
voluntaristic actionsof States a ainstthe politicaland eco-
nomicdominatione ertedby forei ncountriesand resultin
in the rowin duali ationof society,actionsthatreinforce
traditionalsocial and culturalcontrolsand impede protest
movements - the distancebetweeninternalendo enouspro-
cesses of chan e and State-ledor forei n-ledmoderni ation
has becomeobvious.We are even sometimestemptedto ive
up the idea of internal,structuralconflicts, and to consider
that all social problemsshould be understoodas parts of
processesof chan e.Such a viewis as erroneousas theoppo-
site identificationof structuralproblemswithmoderni ation
processes.
A complete typolo yof conflicts should elaborate a
classificationof historical conflicts,parallel with the one
whichhas been presentedfor social conflicts. iachronie
conflictsbelon to the same cate oriesas synchronie conflicts.
They are locatedat a certainlevel of sociallife,and theyare
offensive or defensive. ut itis sufficient
hereto mentiononly
the twotypesof historicalconflicts whichcorrespondto the
hi hestlevelof socialconflicts,in bothitspositiveand ne ative
aspects.
(7) It is appropriateto ive a veryconcretename to the
positivehistoricalconflictsat theirhi hestlevel: theyare na-
tionalconflicts,
because the identityand continuity of a chan -
in ,developin countrycannotbe based on socialactorsand
socialrelationswhichare preciselytransformed, destroyed, or
createdby the processof historicalchan e- fore ample,of

758 SO IAL RESEAR
industriali ation.State and nation are the only actors which

can maintain their identity and proclaim their continuity
throu hout a process of chan e. In all countries, conflicts
about the controlof chan e are conflictsabout the State. That
indicatesthe necessityto separate the politicalsystemas repre-
sentative of internal economic, social, or cultural interests
from the State as central a ent of historicaltransformation.
ere a ain, the e perience of central countries and espe-
cially of the he emonic ones, li e ritain in the nineteenth
centuryand the United States in the twentieth,is misleadin ,
or has been ideolo ically misrepresentedwhen the State was
identified in these countries with a rulin class, with the
people, or with the balance of social forces. The separation
between hi hestlevel social and historicalconflictscan be rep-
resented by the opposition between class conflictand national
conflict which has dominated contemporary history since
Austro-Mar ists tried to combine them and the irst World
War demonstratedthe limitsof proletarian internationalism.
(8) The ne ative e uivalent of national conflictis neocom-
munitarianism, the effortto re ect a historicaltransformation
which comes from abroad and destroystraditionalvalues and
formsof social or ani ation. It could be called an antirevolu-
tion,and it is as importantat the end of the twentiethcentury
as the revolutionarymovements were a century a o. rom
limited Western neocommunitarian tendencies or sects to
fundamentalist,nativist, indi enous ideolo ies and to the
powerful Islamist movement, the planet is more dominated
today by the opposition between social and democratic move-
ments on one side and neocommunitarianStates or political
roups on the other than by the internal social conflictbe-
tween capitalismand socialism. The Leninistrevolutioncorre-
sponds to the hin e which permitted the passa e from the
central role of social conflictsand ideolo ies to the predomi-
nance of historical,State-orientedconflicts.
ehind this cold classification,it is easy to perceive hot
ideolo ical and politicalproblems. or e ample, the verydefi-

nitionof the leftistintellectual,

especiallyin rance,sincethe
reyfuscase, is one who proclaimsthe conver enceof liberal
reforms,class conflicts,revolutions,and nationalliberation
movements.ean-PaulSartrewas themostinfluential of these
intellectuals:he definedhimselfas a petitbour eois - thatis,
as a defenderof Westerndemocracy - but located himself
withinthe untrespassable hori onof Mar ismand supported
actively the Al erian independence movement.These in-
tellectualsopposed colonialismor imperialistwars,at the
same timethattheywere supportin leftistreformsin their
own country. ut it became more and more difficultfor
people who approvedthe Vietnameseliberationmovementto
supportthe anoi re ime,withoutmentionin ambodia,
and it is impossibleto considerStalinistre imesas e pression
of proletarianrevolutions. So the conver encebetweenliber-
ties and liberationappears more and more contradictedby
historical e perience.The separationof various indsof social
and historicalconflicts help us to understandthe conflicts or
tensionswhichoppose themto each otherand whichconfront
each of us withdifficult, sometimesimpossiblechoices.
It is relativelyeasy to see that many analysesof social
movementslimitthemselves to one typeof conflict,enerally
becausethistypeis predominantin a iventypeof society.It
is difficultin manyThird Worldnationsto analy eclasscon-
flictswhere anti-imperialism stru les,neocommunitarian
movements, and the creationof a Statebour eoisie are the
more visibleforces.In an opposite way,manyWesternob-
serversdiscovered socialmovementsonlyin the si tiesand
weremainlypreoccupiedto understandhowsocialinte ration
could be restoredeitherby reformor by a neoconservaitve
tide.
ut suchrelativistremar scan be misleadin It . is necessary
to proposea eneralinterpretation ratherthanto
of conflicts
limitourselvesto classifyinand separatin types.So we must
nowproceedto a moredifficult tas ,whichis to ivea eneral
analysisof the differences and relationsamon varioustypes

7 0 SO IAL RESEAR
of conflicts.More concretely, thatmeans thatwe mustnow

introducethe notionof socialmovement, a termthatwe have
until now carefullyavoided usin in the strictsense. Two
solutionsare possible.The easiestone is to considera social
movementas a enericcate orywhichincludesall indsof
conflicts.utwhatis theuse ofsucha wide
socialand historical
notionwhichis onlysynonymous withcollectiveconflicts
To proposea moreelaborateanalysisof conflicts, we must
the
inte rate previous into
classification a eneralhypothesis
which ivesa different importanceto variousconflicts. rom
the be innin we, actuallyhad to introducesuch a hierarchi-
ationwhenwe constructed a typolo ywhichopposespositive
and ne ativemovementand threelevelsof conflicts, an ima e
whichclearly ives a priorityto the hi hest level, where
conflicts
are or ani edaround the controlof centralcultural
patternsand resources.
The UnityofSocial onflicts
To ma e myhypothesisuite clear,I willuse the concept

socialmovementsonlyto referto conflicts around the social
controlof themainculturalpatterns, thatis,type5. This is an
arbitrary semanticdecision.Othersmaypreferto eepa much
widerand moreva ue definition of socialmovements, but,if
theydo so, they run the ris of fallin into the confusion we
critici edat the be innin .
(1) A privile ecan be iven to a specifictype of social
conflictif othertypesof conflictcan be consideredas disin-
te ratedor partialformsof the centraltype. The type of
conflictI willfromnowon call a socialmovementis defined
by a clear interrelation betweenconflictin actors and the
sta es of their conflict.These three components,which I
identifiedlon a o as the definition of the identity(i) of the
actor, the definitionof the opponent(o), and the sta es,that
is, the culturaltotality(t) whichdefinesthe fieldof conflict,

T E STU O SO IAL MOVEMENTS 7 1
belon to the same universe theye pressthe centralconflict

of a societaltype.11 or e ample,in an industrialsocietyman-
a ementand wor ersare in conflict aboutthesocialcontrolof
industry. These threecomponents,mana ement, wor ers,in-
dustry, are homo eneousmoreover,theyare interdependent:
industry nevere istsper se- thisculturalmode of investment
is alwaysmana edbya rulin roupwhichhas thecapacityto
impose on wor erssome formof divisionof labor. On the
contrary, a political
pressurerepresentsa morelimitedinte ra-
tion of its components:there is no directinterdependence
betweenpoliticalforcesand politicaldecisions.Politicalparties
are enerallymultidimensional, particularlyin representative
democracies,and their aims are defined by strate iesand
tacticsas muchas byprinciplesor directly e presseddemands.
ompetitive parties do not a
represent permanentopposition
li ethe couple mana ement- wor ersdoes. That can be sym-
boli edbywritin thata socialmovementis i-o-t and a politi-
cal stru lei-t, o-t, or i-o. The collectivepursuitof interests
correspondsto an even lower level of inte rationof these
elements:the actorsare self-centered and the fieldof their
competition or conflictcan even be definedas a mar et,which
is definedindependently fromactors.That correspondsto i,
o, t,whereeach elementis separatedfromtheothers.So politi-
cal pressureand defenseof interestmustbe definednotonly
by theirspecificnaturebut as noninte rated and lower-level
social movements.
This hypothesishas an importantconse uence: political
pressureand collectivepursuitof interestare alwayscom-
pletedby e pressionsof a nonactuali ed,virtualsocial move-
ment.A politicalpressureis not ust partof a political ame it
refersto interestand, at a hi herlevel,to a social movement
thatit represents, and it affirmsthatitsown actionwillnever
entirely reachits oal. Most ne otiatorsreferto nonne otiable
11A. Touraine,TheSelf-Production
ofSociety of hica oPress,
( hica o:University
1977).

7 2 SO IAL RESEAR
demands, to basic ri htsof wor ers,or, on the other side, to

superior interestsof the industryand of the nation. What a
social movement e presses directly and practicallyappears
here as principles, ideas, or convictionswhich are relatively
separate fromactual practices.The same holds for the defense
of interests. efore the irst World War, in Western Europe
and in the United States,business unionism was predominant,
but its instrumentalorientationwas completed by intellectual
and politicalradical movementswhich created myths,li e the
Sorelian idea of the eneral stri e.That does not mean that
every form of defense of interest reveals a possible social
movement,but rather that the defense of interestis always a
combination between rational economic behavior and social
movement.In a parallel way, a politicalpressure is intermedi-
ate between a social movement and a strate y. ere we o
much beyond our classification we introduce the hypothesis
that social movementsin a iven societycan be observed not
only directlybut indirectly,in partial,disinte ratedforms,or,
to put it more precisely,thatsomecomponent of social move-
ment must be found in all social conflicts.Theonly limithere
of the penetrationof social movementis the territoryof omo
oeconomicus, but where this territorybe ins, if it really e ists,
social conflictactuallydisappears, is displaced by the triumph
of economic rationality.
(2) Ne ative conflictbehavior, as has already been su -
ested, can be analy ed as overinte rated forms of social
movements. ere the actor identifies himself with values,
eliminatesthe idea of an internalstructuralconflict,and pre-
sents the ima e of an homo eni ed communityto opponents
who are transformedinto enemies. A revolutionrefersfirstto
an internal conflict which, after its triumph, builds a new
social and political order, loo s for purity,and wa es war
a ainst e ternal enemies and traitorswho undermine the new
community.Thus everyrevolutionarycreation of a new order
is led to destroythe social movementit is based on. Saturn ate
his children,revolutionseat theirfathers.This self-destruction

mechanism is supportedbytheideal of a homo eneoussystem

thatwe call sect at a microsociolo ical level and totalitarian
re ime at a macrosociolo ical level.These systems are not ust
communities, preciselybecause theirmainlo icis thedestruc-
tionof socialconflicts, of all indsof socialrelations,and, by
way of conse uence,of all actors.So social movementsare
limitedon one side by omooeconomicus and, on theother,by
i rother.
( ) The subordinationof historicaland particularly na-
tionalmovements to socialmovements is evenmorevisibleand
has been for a lon time at the verycenterof the world s
politicaltransformation. We are firsttemptedto reco ni ethe
separationand parallel importanceof what is enerallye -
pressedas classand nationalmovements, becauseour century
has been dominatedby nationalliberationmovementswhich
have dominatedor destroyedclass-oriented action.The Al e-
rian e ample shows clearlythe defeat of Mar ist-oriented
Messali ad or even of revolutionary populist en ella and
the triumphof the armyheaded by oumedienne.In a dif-
ferentconte t, idel astro,whowas eventually oin to build
a Mar ist- Leninistre ime, ave in theSierraa totalpriority to
uerrillawar over socialdemonstrations and stri es
or ani ed
by the uly2 th movementwhichhad a broad socialbasis in
avana. ommunismand nationalismhave often oined
forces,but neverhas a social movementdevelopeditsauton-
omousactionin a national-revolutionary re ime.Nevertheless,
such a separation,whichimpliesa totaldominationof social
bynationalmovement, is nevercomplete.In manydependent
countries, especially in Latin America, mi ed three-
dimensionalsociopoliticalmovementspredominatewith a
class,an anticolonialist or anti-imperialist, and a nationalinte-
rativedimension. There is no clear separationbetweensocial
movements,politicalforces, and State intervention, so it is
necessaryto analy e national-popularre imesas indirect
e pressionsof social movements.In countrieswithstron er
Statetraditions, the movements or warsof nationalliberation

7 4 SO IAL RESEAR
are not ust national on the contrary,they are similarto

revolutionary movements.They create a new politicaland
social order by re ectin what they call imperialism,colo-
nialism,or decadentbour eoislife.In more eneralterms,it
is difficultto completelyseparate structuralconflictsand
politicalprocessesof historicalchan e.The processof indus-
triali ationis not independent of peasant, plebeian, or
wor in -class socialmovements. So historicalmovements are
alwayscontradictory mi turesof socialmovements and of the
risin power of a new State. ere appears a thirdand last
limitof social movements:the intervention of an absolute
State, absolute referrin here to a pure definitionof the
Stateas a entof historical
developmentand notas a centerof
the institutionalsystem.
(4) If we combinethesethreelinesof analysis,we are able
to defineall typesof conflictby referenceto the centraltype
whichhas been called social movement( i ure 1). This pre-
sentationindicatesthe threeprocessesof transformation of a
social movementinto more instrumental action,into more
inte rativeand communitarian movement, and intohistorical,
i ure 1.
omoOEconomicus Totalitarian systems
N, s
ollective pursuit of Reconstruction of
interests identity
(Sub-movements) v anti-movements)
Political pressure efense of privile es
National movements Neo-communi

tari an
movements
tori aL y me ti
1
Pure State

especiallynationalmovements. And it drawsthelimitsbeyond

whichthe influenceof a socialmovementis destroyed,in the
firstcase byeconomicrationality,in thesecondbythelo icof
a totalitarian
system,and in the thirdcase by a Statewhichis
essentiallyan a entof economicdevelopment.
The entralRole ofSocial Movements

in Sociolo icalAnalysis
The main meanin of thisreconstruction of the analysisof

socialconflictsis not to isolateand underlinethe importance
of socialmovement as a specifictypeof collectivebehaviorbut
to reor ani eour representationof social life around the
notionsof social movement,structuralconflict,and cultural
sta es.
The bestwayto understandthe proposeduse of the term
social movementis to compare the theoreticalapproach it
implieswithothers,each of whichactuallycorrespondsto one
of theformsof disor ani ation of a socialmovementwe have
ust encountered.
(1) There is a clear opposition between a sociolo ical
analysiswhichis or ani edaroundthenotiono society or even
socialsystemand a sociolo ywhich ivesa centralrole to social
movements. The firstimpliesthatactors behaviorsare inter-
preted as indicatorsof the internalprocessesof differentia-
and
tion,inte ration, pattern-maintenance of a socialsystem.
An absenceof correspondence betweeninstitutional rulesand
sociali ationa encies,asynchrony betweensectorialchan es,
aps betweenculturalvalues and institutional channels,or
more simplyine ualityor upward and downwardcollective
social mobilityproduce conflictsand crises whichare both
disruptiveand adaptative.The consciousnessof the actor is
alwaysmisleadin forthissociolo icalschool,simplybecauseit
interpretsin actor-centeredtermssituationsand behavior
whichmustbe conceived,accordin to it,as elementsofa social
systemand as effectsof itsinternalproblems.

7 SO IAL RESEAR
Nobodywillchallen ethe superiority of such an approach

to a sub ectivistsociolo ywhich identifiesitselfwith the
actors opinionsand is unable to e plainthevisiblediscrepan-
cies and contradictionsbetween various actors represen-
tations. ut who is temptedto defendsuch a naivesociolo y
whichreducestheanalystto theroleof a tape recorderor of a
historianof the in The conceptof social movementim-
plies a differentview of social life. Instead of analy in the
social systemas a set of transformations and specifications of
culturalpatternsinto institutional normsand formsof social
and culturalor ani ation, it emphasi esthe structural conflict
in a iven society,especiallywhenit has a hi hcapacityof
moderni ationand achievement,around the controlof the
instruments of transformation and productionof sociallife.
Accordin ly,all aspects of social and culturalor ani ation
manifest, insteadof eneralvalues,bothculturalpatternsand
power relations,and the social movementswhich e press
them.This antipositivist viewof modernsocietiesopposes to
the ima e of a rationali ed,inte rated,and fle iblemodern
societythe rowin importanceof socialmovements and, even
more directly,the conse uencesof an insufficient level of
inte rationof conflictsinto a centralsocial movement:wild
conflictsof interests,pseudocommunitarianwithdrawal,
arbitrary power,and violence,whichis the oppositeof social
conflict.
Our approach is centeredon the representation of social
actorsas both culturallyorientedand involvedin structural
conflicts.Actorsin a modern society - that is, in a society
whichhas a hi hcapacityof achievement - are neitherpurely
rationalnor identifiedwithcommunitarian values. None of
themcan be identified withmodernity or, moreprecisely, with
the set of cultural patterns - epistemic, economic, and
ethical- thatI call historicity.
Mana ersare not more rational
than wor ers,professorsthan students. ifferentsocial
cate oriescan participatemore or less in centralcultural
orientationsand or ani esocial movementsbut can e ually

developdefensiveattitudesor createsubmovements and even

antimovements.
(2) In an opposite way, the structural Mar istschoolhas
recentlydiffusedthe idea thatactors,insteadof bein inte-
ratedin a societybyinternali initsvalues,are submittedto
a lo ic of dominationand are unable to be real actors.This
idea was alreadypresentin Lenin sWhatIs to e one Wor -
ers cannotliberatethemselves becausetheyare prisonersof a
system which limits their spontaneousaction to reformist
ne otiations. In the si ties and seventies, disenchanted
Leninistsreco ni edthatthe revolutionary and scientificin-
telli entsiawhichwas supposed to build a new and liberated
societyforthewor ershad transformed itselfintoaparatchi i
of a totalitarian Stateand thatthe sacrificed enerationwas
followedby manyothers.So a new typeof Mar ist,e - or
para-Mar ists, builtthe ima e of a closed society,in which
conflictsand protestsare no lon er possiblebecause of the
rowin capacityof intervention and manipulation of a central
power.Afterthe pioneerin wor of . Marcuse,a roupof
rench social thin ers,L. Althusserand N. Poulant as,P.
ourdieuand M. oucault,the latterwith reattalentand a
comple and chan in intellectual personality,diffuseda ind
of criticalfunctionalism for whichsocietyis dominatedby
ideolo ical apparatuses of the State or by omnipresent
powerssymboli edby entham sPanopticonor is identified
with its mechanismsof reproduction.The decline of the
labor movement, the transformationof Third Worldnational
liberationmovements intooppressiveor even fanaticre imes,
the influence of Soviet dissidents, had destroyed the
traditionaleschatolo icalconfidence in some movements
whichwere supposed to be popular and libertarian. isillu-
sions withall indsof revolutionary forcesled theoriststo
substitutethe idea of an all-powerful lo icof dominationfor
the abandoned hope of liberatin social movements.At the
same time,thesesocialphilosophersrefusedto e chan etheir
ancientcreeds for a neoliberalismmore and more satisfied

7 8 SO IAL RESEAR
withWesterncountrieswhichidentifiedthemselveswithra-
tionalitywhile they were torturin in Al iersor droppin
napalmon Vietnamesevilla es.This double re ectioncreated
a totallyne ativeima e of social lifein whichalienationand
heteronomous inte ration could be challen edonlyby mar i-
nal revoltsor by individualist aestheticculture.Such a social
philosophyplayed an importantrole in the historyof ideas
and ideolo ies,but it has been hi hlydestructiveof social
analysis.The necessarycriti ueof a declinin or corrupted
typeof socialmovementended up arbitrarily in theima eof a
society without actors.The ima e of our societiesas entirely
dominatedby systemsof controland manipulationis so far
fromobservablefactthatit lured manysociolo ists to replace
fieldstudiesby doctrinaireinterpretations. It transformed it-
self in some countriesinto the dominantideolo yof a self-
destroyin intelli entsia.
( ) A sociolo yof social movementsand more enerallya
sociolo yof actioncan be moreconcretely definedbyopposi-
tion withanothersociolo icalapproach forwhichany refer-
ence to structuralproblemsor conflictsshould be deleted.
We no lon erlive in a social system,says thisschool,but in
situationswhichcannotbe definede ceptas a diversified flow
of chan es. They ta e so seriouslythe ideas of modernity,
achievement, and developmentthattheydefinesocial actors
entirelyby their strate ies,by theirroles and relativeinflu-
ence in theprocessof chan e.The mostconspicuouse ample
of thisapproach is the criti uemade a ainstscientific man-
a ement,as definedbyTaylor, ord,and businessschools,in
thenameof a strate ic viewof mana ement. Symbolically,the
apanesemodelreplacestheAmericanmodelof mana ement.
This sociolo yproposesa pra maticviewof actorsand con-
flictsand re ectsany referenceto a center, be it definedin
termsof culturalvalues, of a lo ic of domination,or as a
centralsocialmovement.Whatis enerally nownas sociolo y
of or ani ations has been the stron hold of thistheory,which
actuallydestroys concept or ani ationand replacesit
the of

withconceptsli e decisionand strate y.It reco ni esas a

centralvalue not reason and its eneral principlesbut the
capacityto elaboratean efficientstrate yin a movin envi-
ronment.Li e structural Mar ism,thispoliticalviewof society
deservescreditbecauseit contributed efficientlyto destroyin
both analysis of industrial conflict, which had been
transformed into ideolo iesor even myths,and the naive
identificationof our own society with universal values.
Moreover,whencollectiveconflicts are stilllooselyformulated
and or ani ed,thestrate ic approachis a indof spontaneous
naturalsociolo yof theelite roupswho are richor powerful
enou hto elaboratecomple strate ies in a hi hlycompetitive
world. ut it does not correspondto the e perienceof most
people, who resistthe initiativeof the elite roupsby with-
drawin intoan individualistic, hedonisticsearchforidentity
or intomar inality or fi htinbac in the nameof traditions,
principles,or alternative viewsof social life.
The notion of resource mobili ationhas been used to
transform the studyof socialmovements intoa studyof strat-
e ies as if actorswere definedby their oals and not by the
social relationshps- and especiallypower relationships - in
whichtheyare involved.Such a transformation is sometimes
acceptable when apparently radicalor ideolo icalmovements
are actuallyinstrumentally orientedinterest roups. ut in too
manycases,thisnotionis used to eliminateen uiriesaboutthe
meanin of collectiveactionas if resourcemobili ation could
be definedindependently fromthe natureof the oals and
the social relations of the actor, as if all actors were
finallyled by a lo ic of economicrationality.
(4) If we considertheworldtoday,themostdynamicrepre-
sentationof sociallifeis neitheroptimistic functionalism,pes-
simisticstructuralMar ism,nor pra maticstrate icconcep-
tionof social actionbut the call foridentity and community.
Throu h a seriesof and
meetin s pro ramsor ani edbythe
United Nations Universityin To yo, especiallyunder the
leadership of Anouar Abdel Male , can be perceived a

770 SO IAL RESEAR
passionatedefenseof the specificity of different nationalor

which
re ionalcivili ations,12 is directlyopposed a univer-
to
salisticrationalist
approach and the privile esit ivesto wec -
rationalit t.Of course wide differencese ist between in-
tellectualswho ivetotalpriority to culturalpluralism- thatis,
tothestru le -
a ainstculturalcolonialism and socialscientists
who tryto combinetheuniversalistic valuesof development -
science,technolo y, -
efficiency with respect foror revival of
culturaland nationalspecificity.ut all of themare lin ed
withthe neocommunitarian movementswhichare the ne a-
tive formof nationalmovements and developan idealistand
oftenreli iousview of social life.
(5) This reviewof fourschoolsof socialthou htwhichare
differentfrom a sociolo yof collectiveaction and social
movementsraises the problemof the relationships between
themand the sociolo yof social movements. ere we must
followthe same principleof analysisas before.Each of these
sociolo icalschoolsmustbe ranteda certainautonomy,but
at thesametimeitcorrespondsto a specificformof disor ani-
ationof a sociolo yof action,whichdeservesa centralplace
preciselybecauseof itscapacityto understandand reinterpret
otherapproaches.
The four schools we opposed to a sociolo yof action-
functionalism, structuralMar ism, strate ic,and civili a-
tional schools - correspondto the formsof decomposition of
socialmovements whichhave been representedin theschema
alreadypresented.
When we pass fromsocial movementsto submovements,
beforecrossin the frontier of sociolo icalanalysisand enter-
in the territoryof omo oeconomicus, we tend to use a
functionalistanalysis,because the actors of a politicalpressure
or of the defenseof collectiveinterests are definedno lon er
as producers of socialor ani ation butas consumers- that
12A. Abdel Male , in a

Alternatives
Pro ecton Sociocultural evelopment han in
World: inal Report(To yo: United Nations University,1985).

is, by theirlevelof participation. Insteadof analy in a form

of social life as the resultof a centralconflictand of its
institutional, politicalconse uencesand solutions,functionalist
approachesidentify valuesand normswithformsof or ani a-
tion and processesof inte rationor disinte ration. ut a
sociolo yof actionob ectsthatno situationcan be reducedto
institutional rulesand hierarchi edstatutes:thereis alwaysa
certainamount of uncertainty, ne otiation,conflict,trans-
formation.
The structural Mar istschoolri htlyunderlinesthe constant
transformation of an open conflictbetweenopposed social
movementsinto a closed order whichhas a certaininertia
reinforced bymechanisms of socialand culturalcontrol.What
we ob ectto is thatno societyis completelyclosed,and cer-
tainlynotindustrialand democraticsocieties,so thatthe main
errorof thisapproach- whichcan transform itselfintoa self-
fulfillinprophecy when it is -
predominant is to deny and
i noretheubi uitouse istenceof actors.WhenI met erbert
Marcusein thestreetsof Parisin May 19 8,nearmassdemon-
strationsand barricadesbuilt by middle-classstudentsin
the heart of the city,I was entitledto e press to him my
mis ivin about
s his idea thatour societiesmade movements
of protestimpossible.At thesame time,studentsand blac sin
theUnitedStates,sometimes inspiredbyMarcuse sideas,were
demonstratinhis e cessivepessimism.
The strate ic schoolis not directlyincludedin the eneral
schemapresentedabove because its representation of social
lifeas a comple flowof chan ewithoutanystructural conflict
is the directoppositeof a sociolo yof social movementsand
cannotbe consideredas one of its formsof decomposition.
ut social actorsare not orientedonlytowardtheirenviron-
ment theyare not only a entsof chan e theybelon to a
certaintypeof sociallife,of productionand culture.A sociol-
o y of strate ies is ri htly predominantin the studyof inter-
nationalrelations it cannotbe centralin the studyof social
relationsin eneral.It is arbitrary to mer estructural prob-

772 SO IAL RESEAR
lems and historicaltransformationsinto one central cate ory,

social chan e, and it is e cessive to react a ainst functionalist
and structuralMar ist theories by isolatin the actor from a
systemwhich is reduced to an environmentin which the actor
is oriented by his interest.
inally, the sociolo ical school which ives priorityto na-
tionalcultureand the defense of the specificityof civili ations
which are threatened by the cultural and economic im-
perialismof universalist-oriented countries,capitalistas well as
communist, maintains the lon traditionwhich was created by
the erman historicalschool of law and other forms of his-
toricistthou ht.Our main criti uea ainst it is thatit identifies
social life with ideolo ies and political philosophies and ne-
lects the real social actors. It is dan erous to identifyE yp-
tian peasants or Moroccan wor ers with Islam or apanese
white-collaremployees with uddhism, even if it is necessary
to ive the reatestimportance to the specificityof each civili-
ation. ultural orientationscannot be separated from social
relations and in particular from relations of power or domi-
nation.
TheNatureofSocial Movements
Let s now present more directlysome principlesof analysis

of social movementswhich have been already implicitlyintro-
duced.
(1) Social movementsare always defined by a social conflict,
that is, by clearly defined opponents. Actors often live their
own actions firstof all as a rupture withpredominantcultural
values or institutionalrules. Alberoni insisted on this opposi-
tion between institutionand movement.1 ut many revoltsor
uprisin s can be nothin but si ns of an internal crisis and
reor ani ationof a social system.A social movementcannot be
defined by its intensity, its emotions, or its volcanic
1 . Alberoni, Movimentoe istitu ione( olo na: II Mulino, 1977).

force - ima eswhichcorrespondbetterto disruptionswhich

can be betteranaly edfroma functionalist pointof view.
(2) The most controversialidea which has been defended
here is thatin a ivensocietaltypethereis onlyone central
couple of conflictinsocial movements.This idea seemsvery
near to the Mar istconceptof classstru leand is constantly
challen edby observerswho describea reatvarietyof con-
flictswhichcannot be consideredas specific fronts of a
eneralwar. These observersre ectthe ideolo icalor even
eschatolo icalconnotationof such a view, which seems to
e press a reli iousbelief in the end of the prehistoryof
man ind.
I sharethesecriticisms and a ree thatit is indispensableto
eliminate the eschatolo icalaspects of many nineteenth-
centurytheories. ut theconceptof socialmovementhas very
littlein commonwiththe ideas whichare here ri htlycrit-
ici ed.Socialmovements are notpositiveor ne ativea entsof
history,of moderni ation, or of the liberationof man ind.
Theyactin a iventypeof socialproductionand or ani ation.
This is the reason whywe emphasi ethe priorityof social,
structural conflicts over historicalmovements. Once thismis-
understandin has been eliminated, it becomes clear thatthe
multiplicity of socialconflicts
or, more precisely,the idea that
thereis no centralconflictcorrespondsto a system-centered
analysis.In the same wayas a car can brea downfora series
of reasonsand as thereis nothin in commonbetweena flat
tire,a lac of as, and a bro en earbo ,manypeople are
satisfiedwithobservin that there is apparentlynothin in
commonbetweenethnicminoritiesprotest,women slib, in-
dustrialunions,urbancrisis,and antiwarmovements. Who is
oin to deny that these conflictsare lar elyseparatedfrom
each other ut thispedestrianobservation is no ar umentto
re ect the idea that a centralconflicte ists a iventypeof
in
society.And even in industrialsocieties,it was easyto observe
reatdistancesbetweenunions,socialistparties,cooperatives,
popular culturemovements, municipalaction,and so on.

774 SO IAL RESEAR
If I devotedtheprecedin pa es to a ratherlon definition

of a ivenapproachin relationwithothers,mypurposewas to
et rid of a primitivetypeof social thou htwhichidentifies
analyticalcate orieswithhistoricalfacts.We have no ri htto
say thatthe United Statesis an industrialor postindustrial,
democraticor capitalistcountry,as if all aspectsof American
life should be consideredas attributes of one of these defi-
nitions.Onlyconcreteresearchand discussionscan definethe
de reeof inte ration of specificconflicts
intoa eneralsocial
movement.
I devoteda seriesof researchpro ectsto theanalysisof what
is oftencalled new social movements, thatis, more precisely,
new socialconflicts. My oal was and stillis to detectwhether
or notthereare somecommonelements insomeofthem,ifthere
is somesocialmovement in conflictswhichhave obviously other
components. What is stri in today is that thishypothesisis
often accepted,even if it is in ratherva ue terms.Many
observersare aware of the factthatcentralconflicts deal less
withlabor and economic problemsthan withculturaland
especiallyethicalproblems,because the dominationwhichis
challen edcontrolsnot only means of production but the
productionof symbolic oods, that is, of information and
ima es, of cultureitself.
These briefremar s
do not intend to
demonstrate such a eneralhypothesis but onlyto ma eclear
thatthe precedin pa es can help us to understandhow a
centralconflictand social movementcan appear throu ha
reatvarietyof conflictsin whichothercomponentscan have
more wei htand be even predominant.
( ) The reasonwhyso manypeople are spontaneously con-
vincedof the pluralityof conflictsis thattheyidentify social
movementswithoppositionor popular movementswhich
challen e social order. On the contrary,a popular social
movement cannotbe separatedfroma socialmovement of the
rulin class, and only theirconflictcan be considered as
central. oldersof economicor politicalpower must be ana-
ly ed as a social movementinsteadof bein identifiedwith

centralculturalvalues and social norms.Referrin to an in-

dustrialsociety,I wouldconsidermana ementa social move-
mente actlyin the same wayas labor,and ord as a move-
mentleader or an ideolo istin the same wayas ompersor
Reuther.So the centrality of social movementsnevermeans
their he emony,theircapacityto identifythemselveswith
socialorder,modernity, or rationality.
Such an identificationis
neverobtained,even by a rulin class, but onlyby an abso-
lute State,whichdestroyssocial actors,both powerfuland
powerless.
(4) If we oftenfeeluncomfortable withtheidea of a central
socialmovement, it is becausewe are stillinfluencedbya lon
traditionwhichidentifiessocial movementsand politicalac-
tion, that is, or ani ed action aimin at controllin State
power.This confusionhas been centralin European thou ht
wherethe labor movementhas oftenbeen consideredsynon-
ymouswithsocialism, bothin ommunist circlesand in social-
democraticStates.Americanintellectual lifehas provedmore
able to understandthe concept of social movementwhile
Europeansand LatinAmericansfora lon timespo eonlyof
revolutionsor of State-ledreforms.
It is typicalof evolutionistsocial thou htnot to separate
structureand chan e, social and historical movements.
lassicalsociolo ydefinedWesternsocietyboth as a system
and as a processof moderni ation.ur heiminsistedmoreon
one aspectand Weberon the other,but Parsonsreachedan
e tremepointof identification of modernity, as a processof
rationali ation and seculari ation, withprinciplesof unityand
inte ration of modernWesternsocieties.In the same way,in
Latin America and in other parts of the world today,
sociolo icalanalysisis stillidentifiedwiththe studyof the
formationof a nationalState.
The noveltyof the conceptof social movementas I use it
here is thatit opposes itselfto thistypeof socialthou htand
emphasi esthe analyticalseparationbetweensocial move-
mentsand transformations of theState.To putitin traditional

77 SO IAL RESEAR
terms,it is based on the ei hteenth-century idea of the sep-

arationbetweencivilsocietyand State.That is whytheidea of
social movementinterpretsverypowerfully the attemptsof
society to liberateitselffrom power, to use thee actwords
bywhichSolidarity defineditsactiona ainsttheparty-state in
Poland.
It would be a mista eto loo todayin our countriesfora
politicalprincipleof unificationof social movements. or
Lenin,theclassin itselfwas transformed intoa classforitself
a
onlyby revolutionary avant- ardeparty.The idea of social
movementis clearlyanti-Leninist and impliesthatthe nature
of a socialmovementcan be definedonlyin termsof cultural
sta esand conflictsbetweensocial, civil actors.That obvi-
ouslysupposesthatthewholeof civilsocietyis not mobili ed
or repressedby an absoluteState.
(5) Three main indsof socialmovements shouldbe distin-
uished. Social movements, in a strict
sense,representconflict-
in efforts to control cultural patterns( nowled e,invest-
ment,ethics)in a ivensocietaltype. istorical movements are
or ani edactionsto controla processof passa e fromone
societaltypeto anotherone. ere actorsare no lon erde-
finedin purelysocial termsbut firstof all by theirrelation-
ships withthe State,whichis the centrala ent of such his-
toricaltransformations. Nevertheless,historicalmovements,
as I alreadymentioned,are not completelyseparatedfrom
socialmovements becausetheycombinea classdimensionwith
a nationaland moderni in one, as is visibleboth in om-
munist movementsand in national-popularre imes. The
same comple ity characteri es culturalmovements.They cannot
be reduced to culturalinnovations,which are defined in
purelyculturaltermsas a uarrelbetweenancientsand mod-
erns,to referto an episodein thehistory of renchliterature.
A culturalmovement,on the contrary,is a type of social
movement in whichthetransformation of culturalvaluesplays
a centralrole but in whichsocial conflictappears withinthis
process of transformation of values. A ood contemporary

e ampleis thewomen smovement.It is centrally definedbya

criti ueand transformation of women sstatusand ima e,and
more broadlyby the emer enceof new ethicalvalues,but it
is constantly divided by a social conflictwhichopposes two
waysof interpretinwomen sprotest:a liberalaction,aimin
at achievin e ualityof ri htsand opportunities betweenmen
and women,and a more radical tendencywhichre ectsan
e ualitywhichappears to be imitativeof the dominantmale
model and assertsthe specificity of women sculture,e peri-
ence, and action.This internalconflict,whichhas been espe-
ciallyvisiblein the United Statesand rance,draws a clear
separationbetweenculturalinnovationand culturalmove-
ment.
New Social Movements
(1) The mostseriouscriti ueof the notionof social move-

ment,as I use it here, is that it corresponds,li e all mac-
rosociolo ical concepts,to a specifictypeof society.We cannot
analy e our societies withthe conceptsof caste or Standand
less and less of class.In the same way,is not socialmovement
an abstractname for labor movement,a enerali ationof a
iventypeof industrialsociety Some introducea moreposi-
tivecriti ue:let ssubstitute in our vocabularyminoritiesfor
socialmovements, let sabandonall references to a newsociety
and reco ni ethatin our mass societyprotestmovements do
notpretendto becomea ma ority and to etle itimate power
but definethemselvesas minorities. They do not pretendto
transform society theyare liberalor libertarian, and tryto
lowerthelevelof socialcontroland inte ration. Theyfi htfor
a societydefined by its diversity,addin ethnic or moral
pluralismto politicalpluralismand freeenterprise.The most
e tremeformof these criti uesassertsthat all models of
collectivelife should be respectedand the only paramount
value is individualism: the onlypossiblemovementshould be

778 SO IAL RESEAR
antisocial,pushin bac theinvasionof collectivecontrolsand

or ani ations, destroyin statusesand roles to freethe indi-
vidual, his desires,dreams,and ima ination.
(2) All thesecriti ues,e cessiveas theysometimesare, help
us to free ourselvesfromsocial and politicalmodels which
wereinheritedfroma declinin typeof society.I have already
indicated some deep differencesbetween industrialsocial
movementsand present-day conflicts.We mustnow deepen
our analysis.
All social movementsin the past were limited,because the
fieldof theiraction- thatis, the capacityof a societyto pro-
duce itself - was limited,even in the most achievement-
orientedsocieties.What I call historicity, the capacityto pro-
duce an historicale periencethrou hculturalpatterns,that
is, a new definition of natureand man,was limitedby whatI
call metasocial uaranteesof social order. Men thou ht
theylivedin a microcosm includedin a macrocosmwhoselaws
imposeda definitionof human natureand le itimated social
norms.All social movements, at the same timeas theywere
definin sta esand enemies,were referrin to a metasocial
principlewhichwas calledorderof thin s,divinerule,natural
law,or historical evolution(theidea of modernity is one of the
last metasocialprinciples).In our times,we feel thatour ca-
pacity of self-production,self-transformation, and self-
destructionis boundless. Industrial societieswere able to
transformmeansof productionto inventmechanicaldevices
and systems of or ani ation, but our society invents
technolo iesto produce symbolic oods, lan ua es,informa-
tion. It produces not only means but ends of production,
demands,and representations. It is alreadyable to transform
our body,our se uality, our mentallife.The resultis thatthe
fieldof socialmovements e tendsitselfto all aspectsof social
and cultural life. This conclusionis the opposite of the
structuralMar istidea accordin to whichsocial life is con-
trolledby a centrala ency.The publicspace- ffentlich- eit
strictlylimitedin a bour eoissociety,was e tendedto labor

problemsin an industrialsocietyand now spreads over all

fieldsof e perience:privatelife becomes public and social
scientistswho announced some yearsa o that,aftera lon
period of public life,we were withdrawininto privatelife,
did notsee thatthemainpoliticalproblemstodaydeal directly
with privatelife- fecundationand birth,reproductionand
se uality,illness and death, and, in a differentway, with
home-consumedmass media.
( ) This e traordinarytransformation, which ma es all
principlesand rulesproblematic, createstwo mainobstaclesto
theformation of socialmovements. The firstone is thedisap-
pearanceof metasociallimitswhichprovidedcollectiveaction
witha principleof unitywhichwas bothne ativeand positive.
Marcuseand othersraisedthe uestion:when ods are dead,
when uiltand redemptionlose theirmeanin ,whatcan we
oppose to utilitarianism or hedonism The Westerne peri-
ence can be consideredas a shortand dramaticperiod of
seculari ation,Ent auberun which
, correspondsto the eco-
nomicta eoffbut rapidlyends up in a utilitarianconsumer
society. i rotheris not a dan erous enemy for social
movementsin democraticsocieties e otismis. ut here is
e actlythepointwherenewsocialmovements enterthescene.
Past social movementswere lin ed to metasocialprinciples,
but theyopposed themselvesto the dominationof tradition
and naturalprinciplesnew social movementsare threatened
by utilitarianism,but theydefend the self and its creativity
a ainstinterestand pleasure. ominationcan no lon erbe
challen edby a call to metasocialprinciplesonlya directcall
to personaland collective freedomand responsibility can foster
protest movements. In a parallelway,rulin roups are no
lon er motivated by a Protestant ethicor itse uivalent only
self-reali ation
and creativity can motivatethemas entrepre-
neurs.Social movements are no lon erspurredbytheima es
ofan idealsocietybutbythesearchofcreativity. The utilitarian
traditionis the main limitand obstacleto social movements
todayas reli ionwas in more traditionalcultures.

780 SO IAL RESEAR
(4) New social movementsare less sociopoliticaland more

sociocultural.The distancebetweencivilsocietyand State is
increasin whilethe separationbetweenprivateand publiclife
is fadin away.The continuity fromsocialmovementto politi-
cal partyis disappearin politicallifetendsto be a depressed
area betweena stron erState in a chan in international
environment and, on theotherside,sociocultural movements.
The main ris is no lon erto see socialmovements absorbed
by politicalparties,as in ommunist re imes, but a complete
separationbetweensocial movementsand State. In such a
situation,social movementscan easily become se mented,
transform themselves intodefenseof minorities or searchfor
identity,whilepubliclifebecomesdominatedby pro-or anti-
Statemovements. That is whatis happenin today,especially
in ermanyand the UnitedStates,withpeace movements. It
is possiblethatthrou hsuch historicalmovements, new so-
cial movementswill eventuallyachieve a hi h capacityof
politicalaction,pro ressin from r erini iativen to a reen
partyand inventin newformsof politicallife buta different
of an anti-State
evolutionis e uallypossible:the crystalli ation
movement,more and more distinctfromscatteredsociocul-
turalmovements. This situationcorrespondsto thebe innin
of manyindustrialsocietieswhen anarchist,communist, and
hristian roupswerechallen in Stateand churchwhile,far
fromthem,wea unions,wildcatstri es, and riotse presseda
confusedmi tureof wor ers rievancesand of decline of
preindustrial craftsand cities.
(5) The mainconditionforsocialmovements to ta eshape
is the consciousnessthatwe are enterin a new typeof social
life. urin the si tiesand earlyseventies,thecrisisof indus-
trialvaluesprevailedover the notionof postindustrial society.
The firstnewsocialmovements wereso closelylin edwiththe
counterculture that theycollapsed when risin e pectations
were replacedby shrin in prospects.Thus, durin the late
seventiesand even,in Europe,theearlyei hties,our historical
e periencehas been dominatedbythe idea of crisis.Individ-

ual and nationallifeseemed to be determinedby unforesee-

able events,li e chan es in the dollar or the price of oil,
apanesecompetition or Sovietmilitary pressure.I critici ed,
as earlyas in 19 9, the notionof postindustrial society,as it
had been conceivedby . ell, thatis, as a hyperindustrial
society. ifteenyearslater,aftera shortperiodof enthusiasm
for the thirdwave, few observers,especiallyin business
circles,are ready to spea of a postindustrial revolution.A
new industrialrevolutionor a new leap forwardin industrial
productivity seemsto be a moreade uate e pression.Ameri-
cans in eneralhave been verycautiousin their ud ments,
whilemorevoluntaristic countriesli e apan and ranceare
still spea in of an electronicrevolution,in the firstcase
becauseitis identified withtheprideof a apanmade number
one, in the second because rench overnment a enciesare
filledwithan uishas theyconsidertheadvanceof theUnited
Statesand apan in manyhi h-tech industries.
Postindustrial societymustbe definedin a more lobaland
radicalwaytoday,as a new cultureand a fieldfornew social
conflictsand movements. A broad occupationaldefinitionof
an information society misleadin and cannot ustifythe
is
idea thata different societyis ta in shape. On the contrary,
postindustrial societymust be defined more strictly by the
of
technolo icalproduction symbolic oods which shape or
transform our representation of human nature and of the
e ternalworld. or thesereasons,researchand development,
informationprocessin ,biomedicaiscience and techni ues,
and mass media are the fourmaincomponentsof postindus-
trialsociety,whilebureaucratic or productionof felec-
activities
tricaland electronice uipmentare ust rowin sectorsof an
industrialsocietydefinedby productionof oods more than
bynewchannelsof communications and thecreationof artifi-
cial lan ua es.
Only the or ani ationof new social movementsand the
development of different
culturalvaluescan ustifytheidea of
a new societythatI preferto call a pro rammed morethan ust

782 SO IAL RESEAR
a postindustrialsociety. The comparison with the historyof

industrialsocietyis once more useful: in the Western World,
crises of old values and new economic challen es come first
before new social actors and conflictsta e shape new formsof
political life and new ideolo ies appear even later. This is a
practical reason why sociolo y today must ive a central im-
portance to the concept of social movement- not only to sepa-
rate itselffrom an old definitionof its ob ect as the studyof
society,which should be replaced by the studyof social action,
but, more concretely,because the constructionof a new ima e
of social life re uires, ri ht now, the concept of social move-
ment as a brid e between the observationof new technolo ies
and the idea of new formsof politicallife. This concept could
not play a centralrole in previous formsof social thou ht for
the first time, it can become the eystone of sociolo ical
analysis.
( ) The dan er here is to be lured by voluntaristicassump-
tions. The concept of social movementis useful when it helps
one to rediscover social actors where they have been buried
beneath either structural Mar ist or rationalist theories of
strate iesand decisions. urin the seventies,the dominant
ideolo y was that ethnic minorities, li e all dominated
roups, school students,hospitalinmates,and othershad to be
defined by the e clusion, labelin , and sti mati ationthey
suffered,in other words, as victims.Only an analysisbased on
the idea of social movement can challen e directlyand effi-
cientlysuch a view and help rediscover that these alienated
and e cluded cate ories are neverthelessactors and are often
more able than the silent ma ority to analy e theirsituation,
define pro ects, and or ani e conflictswhich can transform
themselves into an active social movement. In the same
way, how many ews today would accept to be defined with-
out any referenceto ewishculture or to Israel A similaruse
of the concept social movement can aid in the criticismof an
ima e of the school systemwhich emphasi es the impact of

social ine ualityon academicresultsand futureoccupational

achievements. Instead of considerin teachersand pupils as
determinedby social and culturaline ualitiesbeyond their
reach, the emphasismust be put on the autonomyof the
schoolsystem, on itscapacityto increaseor decreaseine uality
of opportunities, so thateducationcan be conceivedas a field
of debatesand pro ectswhichcan probablynotbe interpreted
as directsocialmovements but,in a morelimitedand indirect
way, as manifestations of a tensionbetweeneducationas so-
ciali ationand as individuation, oppositionwhiche pressesa
more eneralconflict. situationswhichare enerallyinter-
In
pretedin termsof participation or e clusion,of conformity
and deviance,the idea of social movementintroducesa dif-
ferentapproach because it triesto evaluate the capacityof
variouscate oriesto transform themselves intoactorsof their
own situationand of its transformation.
ut we should distrusttoo simpleima es of social move-
mentsas consciousand or ani ed actions.Especiallyin our
times:today,as at thebe innin of the IndustrialRevolution,
itis easierto describemasses, dan erousclasses, riots,or the
formation of a newelitethansocialmovements whichare not
yetor ani ed. ultural orientationsand political are
conflicts
more visiblethan social problems,and these are too easily
analy edin termof mar inality and e clusion.It too some
timein the nineteenthcenturyto discoverthe politicalca-
pacityof the laborin classes we are only approachin an
analo oussta e of evolutionof the new social movements.
Let s considerthreemore e amplesof the comple nature
of newsocialconflicts. The actionsa ainsttheindustrial use of
nuclearener yhave revealeda new ind of protest,a ainst
decisionma erswhohave thepowerto shape nationallifefor
a lon periodof timein a technocraticway.This actiontries
to fostera rass-roots democracy. ut at the same time,they
are orientedby a defensiveand communitarian countercul-
tureoftenloaded withirrationalism. This duality be com-
can

784 SO IAL RESEAR
pared with the firststa es of the labor movement when an-

ticapitalist protest was mi ed with the defense of semi-
independent craftsmendisplaced by industry.
The women s movement,beyond its e ualitarian oals, has
destroyed traditionalima es of the femininenature, but it
has often been lin ed with an ideolo y which was inherited
from the labor movement and which imposed upon it
cate oriesof analysisand protestwhich did not correspond to
the motivationsof militantwomen.
In a more eneral way, from the seventiesuntil today, the
displacement of protest from the economic to the cultural
field has been lin ed withan opposite tendency,the privati a-
tion of social problems, an an ious search for identityand a
new interest for the body, demands which can lead to the
definitionof new social norms or, in an opposite way, to an
individualism which e cludes collective action. It ta es few
pa es to define and defend the concept of social movement,
but it should ta e many years for sociolo iststo disentan le
various components of comple social and cultural actions,
and to identifythe presence of social movementsin collective
behavior which has many more components.
onclusion
The factthat many sociolo istsare now interestedin social

movements, even if this notion is too often used in a loose
sense, reveals the end of a lon period of sociolo ical thou ht
durin which the concept of social system played a central
role. This classical sociolo y is now challen ed on one side by
utilitarianswho try to discover economic rationalitybehind
collective action and by analysts of strate ies and limited
rationality who are interestedin processes of chan e which
respond to transformationsof the environment and on the
otherside, not only by neocommunitariansocial thin erswho
oppose the specificityof each civili ationto a forei n-ledde-
velopmentbut firstof all by sociolo istswho refuse to separate

culturalorientations fromsocial conflicts,and who ive,as I

do myself,a basic role to the notion of social movement,
definedas an a ent of conflictfor the social controlof the
main culturalpatterns.These two diver entstreamsof cri-
ti ues attac not only optimisticfunctionalism but, withthe
same stren th, structural
pessimistic Mar ism.Then the con-
cept of social movement, as I used it here, is part of the
eneral debate which opposes the main sociolo icalschools
and whichcan be summedup by the schemain i ure 2.
If we acceptthateconomicrationalismand defenseof cul-
foroppositereasons,driftout of thefieldof
turalspecificities,
sociolo y,whichis enerallydefinedas the studyof social
- thatis, as the e planationof individualand collec-
relations
tivebehaviorby the social relationsin whichthe actorsare
involved- the main debates in sociolo ycan be definedin
moreconcentrated terms.Each mainsociolo icalschoolcan be
defined by its emphasison one of two main approaches:
on one side,itputstheemphasismoreon theactorsor,on the
contrary, on thesystem, and, on theotherside,it insistsmore
on socialinte ration These twochoices
or on social conflicts.
are by no meansparallel on the contrary, theircombinations
definethe main choicesfor sociolo ists.
A firstschool ivesa priority to the unityof the systemits
main conceptis socialsystem. A second insistson the internal
conflictof a systemstructural Mar ismis itsmostinfluential
e pressiontoday,but it can be morebroadlydefinedby the
centralroleit ivesto ine uality.A thirdschool ivesa central
importanceto the mana ementof chan e. The conceptsof
i ure 2.
System Actor
Inte ration Social system Strate y

( functionalism ) ( neo-rat ionalism )
onflict ine uality Social movement

(structuro-mar ism) (Sociolo y of action)

78 SO IAL RESEAR
or ani ation and decisionhave enerallycorrespondedto this

orientation, which is best definedtodayby the centralrole it
ivesto the of
study strate ies. The lastone emphasi esat the
same timeactorsand conflictsits viewof social lifeis or a-
ni ed around the concept of social movement. It should
be added thatthese eneralapproachescan be used directly
or at a less lobal level. or e ample, the idea of social
movement can be replaced by an analysis of political
pressures - as it is the case in manyof Tilly swor -s or even
of public opinion transformations. The factthat an author
locateshimselfat a societal,political,or or ani ationallevel
shouldnot be confusedwithhis eneralorientation.
I have triedin this paper to ma e clear how a sociolo y
whichis or ani edaroundtheconceptof socialmovement can
both reco ni ethe relativeautonomyof other schools and
critici ethem. ut,as a conclusion,it is moreusefulto reco -
ni e the e istenceand stren th of the fourmainorientations
of sociolo yand maybeto su estthattodaythe centralde-
bate opposes the conceptsof strate yand social movements
while twentyyears a o the hottestdiscussionsopposed the
ideas of social systemand ine uality.This transformation of
thedebatesshowsthatsociolo yas a wholehas movedfroma
studyof social systemand its principleof inte rationto an
analysisof social actionand social chan e.This fundamental
transformation produces deep intellectualcrises. We are
probablystillin a periodof uncertainty aboutwhatis themost
creative paradi m in sociolo icalthou ht,and some are
temptedto abandon not onlythe old functionalist model but
thewholeof sociolo yitself,bycallin in nonsociolo ical ideas
or Vol s eist
li e omo oeconomicus ( i ure ).
i ure .
Economic Analysis of or ani ations, unctionalist ) Study of efense of
V systems I cultural
, . s y f action I and
yS and flnational
social mo-lspecif ici ty
Rationalism ecisions and strate ies Structuro-mar ism vements

The conceptof socialmovementis all themorenecessaryto

the e tentto whichit facilitatesthe transcendenceof the
presentwea nessand confusionof sociolo yby offerin a
directcriti ueof themodelof analysiswhichis in crisisand by
introducin a new eneralapproach,new debates,and new
fieldsof concreteresearch.The worstpossiblemista ewould
be to considersocial movementsas the ob ect of one more
chapterin boo swhose eneraldesi nand orientations would
notbe chan ed,as if it wereusefulin certainperiodsto insist
on crises and conflictsand, in others,on institutions and
sociali ation.
The maturity of a fieldof nowled ecan be measuredbyits
abilityto or ani eitswor sand discussionsabouta fewcentral
problems.Today, the central problem of sociolo y,in a
rapidlychan in world,is to understandthe productionand
controlof chan e, and its centraldebate must oppose the
conceptsof strate yand social movements.These concepts
representto some e tentcomplementary approaches,but it is
indispensableforstudentsof each schoolto trybuildin com-
petitive eneraltheories.Only the debatebetweenthesecon-
flictin ima es of social life can ive bac to sociolo ythe
vitalityit seems to have lost.


M 1 (b) 1 an Introduction to Social Movements - At

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

M 1 (b) 1 an Introduction to Social Movements - At

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

An Introduction to the Study of Social Movements

Author(s): ALAIN TOURAINE

This content downloaded from 148.206.159.132 on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 14:10:15 PM

A he notionof social movement,li e most notionsin the

SO IAL RESEAR , Vol. 52, No. 4 (Winter 1985)

This content downloaded from 148.206.159.132 on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 14:10:15 PM

indispensableto compare one s own cate orieswith other

There is an almost enerala reementthatsocialmovements

This content downloaded from 148.206.159.132 on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 14:10:15 PM

in foror ne otiatin to ta econtrolof. Such an elementary

This content downloaded from 148.206.159.132 on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 14:10:15 PM

defined by their positions on a hierarchical scale, and the

This content downloaded from 148.206.159.132 on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 14:10:15 PM

limitsof definition of socialconflict. If thefirstone is reduced

5 . . March and . Simon, Or ani ations(New or : Wiley, 1958).

This content downloaded from 148.206.159.132 on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 14:10:15 PM

(4) In the same way,as the defenseof an identityis the

This content downloaded from 148.206.159.132 on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 14:10:15 PM

whichour relationships withtheenvironment are normatively

This content downloaded from 148.206.159.132 on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 14:10:15 PM

acceptedby Tilly,has been efficiently critici edby historical

8 V. onnell, RootsofRebellion:Wor ersPoliticsand Or ani ations in St. Petersburand

This content downloaded from 148.206.159.132 on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 14:10:15 PM

cause theirspecifice perienceis thattheirown industriali a-

This content downloaded from 148.206.159.132 on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 14:10:15 PM

industriali ation.State and nation are the only actors which

This content downloaded from 148.206.159.132 on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 14:10:15 PM

nitionof the leftistintellectual,

This content downloaded from 148.206.159.132 on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 14:10:15 PM

of conflicts.More concretely, thatmeans thatwe mustnow

The UnityofSocial onflicts

To ma e myhypothesisuite clear,I willuse the concept

This content downloaded from 148.206.159.132 on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 14:10:15 PM

belon to the same universe theye pressthe centralconflict

This content downloaded from 148.206.159.132 on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 14:10:15 PM

demands, to basic ri htsof wor ers,or, on the other side, to

This content downloaded from 148.206.159.132 on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 14:10:15 PM

mechanism is supportedbytheideal of a homo eneoussystem

This content downloaded from 148.206.159.132 on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 14:10:15 PM

are not ust national on the contrary,they are similarto

Political pressure efense of privile es

National movements Neo-communi

This content downloaded from 148.206.159.132 on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 14:10:15 PM

especiallynationalmovements. And it drawsthelimitsbeyond

The entralRole ofSocial Movements

The main meanin of thisreconstruction of the analysisof

This content downloaded from 148.206.159.132 on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 14:10:15 PM

Nobodywillchallen ethe superiority of such an approach

This content downloaded from 148.206.159.132 on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 14:10:15 PM

developdefensiveattitudesor createsubmovements and even

This content downloaded from 148.206.159.132 on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 14:10:15 PM

This content downloaded from 148.206.159.132 on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 14:10:15 PM

withconceptsli e decisionand strate y.It reco ni esas a

This content downloaded from 148.206.159.132 on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 14:10:15 PM

passionatedefenseof the specificity of different nationalor

12A. Abdel Male , in a

This content downloaded from 148.206.159.132 on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 14:10:15 PM

is, by theirlevelof participation. Insteadof analy in a form

This content downloaded from 148.206.159.132 on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 14:10:15 PM

lems and historicaltransformationsinto one central cate ory,

Let s now present more directlysome principlesof analysis

This content downloaded from 148.206.159.132 on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 14:10:15 PM

force - ima eswhichcorrespondbetterto disruptionswhich

This content downloaded from 148.206.159.132 on Tue, 9 Dec 2014 14:10:15 PM