Network
Activism, Technology and Identitarian Connections
– New Perspectives from Social Movements
Prof. Dr. Machado, Jorge Alberto S.
School of Arts, Sciences and Humanities
University of São Paulo.
Link http://www.forum-global.de/jm/art06-07/network_activism
Paper
presented at Internationl Sociological Association
Conference, Durban, South Africa, 20 July -22 July, 2006.
The full version got the "High Commended Paper" award from ISA YS World Competion, 2005
IntroductionThis
essay aims to shed light on the basic characteristics of
the new organizational forms that social movements have developed, on
the basis
of the growing incorporation of new information and communication
technologies
into their strategies of planning, articulation and action. My argument
here is
that such technologies have not only become instruments of a
fundamental
importance for the organization and articulation
of such social
collectivies but that they have also led to the emergence of new
social movements
and new forms of activism.
The new
strategies for action that social
movements have developed draw our attention to their innovative
character, as
movements in which the sharing of goals, alignment of strategies and
formation
of coalitions and alliance of global scope play a central role. These
are
frequent and recurring elements, resulting from the geography of the
cultural
and linguistic communities they bring together, or through the
identification
of shared values.
This
phenomenon has opened up a wide range of social changes and
transformation that point to the emergence of new dynamics of
collective action
based on complex identitarian networks, guided by values that are
increasingly
“universal". The
analysis that follows
examines these new tendencies in collective action.
Changing
Conceptions of Social Movements.
There
are a
wide variety of theories that attempt to explain the behavior of social
collectivities, and of social movements in particular. The complexity of the issue and the diversity
of contexts and objects have made it into an almost unlimited source of
study,
analysis and new theoretical developments. Rather than going into the conceptual debate on the
meaning of social
movements, I prefer to cite Melucci’s claim that in their
effort to define
social movements, the majority of authors who write on this subject do
little
more than isolate particular emprirical aspects of collective
phenomena,
accentuating distinctive features and in doing so,
making any kind of
comparative work only more difficult.
According to Melucci, the concept of social movement
“is always an
object of knowledge constructed by the researcher or
theorist”, since it cannot
“coincide with the empirical complexity of action.” (Melucci, 1996: 21-2).
The
diversification
of social movements has taken place within a process that was
intimately linked
to the deepening of democratic mechanisms and institutions in Western
capitalist societies. Even
though they
could be seen as an expression of class struggle or social inequality,
the
strengthenng and proliferation of social movements has been more
associated
with the maturing or transformation of democratic institutions and of
civil
society’s ability to organize itself.
In
the midst
of globalization
and a deepening crisis
of the State, social movements have taken on a new face. Particular aspects of an
identitarian nature,
linked to the growth of multiculturalism and
to the expanding
sphere of action of individuals, have
taken on an ever-greater
importance as bonds between subjects and social collectivities. This universalist
dimension is connected with
the ever-greater sharing of values related to minority rights, freedom
of
expression, rights of cultural diversity, religious liberty,
environmental
conservation, demands for racial and gender equality , the quality of
life and
a more just distribution of social benefits throughout the global
economy, etc.
It is no coincidence that these are also issues that occupy a central
place on
the agendas of governments and multi-lateral organizations . style="color: blue;">
Notwithstanding
this formal change in the
relationship between governments and
civil society that, since the crisis of socialism, has taken place in
the way
civil and social rights are dealt with, it must also be stated that the
relationships between social movements and institutions, governments
and
corporations are permeated with conflict.
Before moving ahead, we
should clarify the
three fundamental factors that will provide the groundwork for our
analysis. They are
linked to interdependence,
loss of control, and the
empowerment of social and economic agents:
i)
Interdependence
and reactive interconnection. There is an
increasingly widespread
situation of indefinition that characterizes the relationship between
local and
“global” government.
Decisions made by
local governments not only affect the State or their own particular
areas of
jurisdiction; unfortunately, these governments must also respond to
situations
that occur beyond the pale of their control.
Attempts to “re-order” or establish
new conditions of equilibrium must
inexorably pass through the political
concert of the actors involved. International treaties, agreements and
pacts
become increasingly more necessary in establishing cooperation,
partnerships
and alliances with other social actors working in other places and
environments. If the growing interdependence
of the local and
global has caused the decisions that affect political communities to
“escape”
local control, the reactive interconnection
between local actors
contributes in some way to the continuous undermining of local
democratic
government. This
goes on through a
process in which attempts to obtain control lead to the
creation of new
connections.
ii)
The
gray areas where control is lost. Many
actors, as is the case for
large scale economic corporations, fall increasingly outside the realm
of
control of democratically elected governments.
This means that they act within juridical contexts which
are unstable or
perhaps even non-existent, in a “gray area” in
which it is possible to protect
oneself from or even escape from local jurisdiction and the control of
organized civil society within States.
We refer here, for example, to the movement of capital
(allocation of
investment, international remittance, transactions between branches of
a firm),
to the use of labor, respect for environmental law and social and labor
rights,
among others. This
in turn produces a
context of conflict that poses considerable challenges to democracy.
iii)
The
empowerment of social agents. In places
where there is no government
or legitimate authority in charge, the instruments that have been
created by an
information society contribute to stimulating competition among social
agents. The opportunities
and risks of businesses that are
increasingly complex and venturous and the instability of national
markets
integrated within a gigantic global market pose growing challenges to
the
intervention and control of nation States, taking their toll on
governability
and accountability. On
the one hand, as
Held (1997) has observed, a considerable amount of the decisions that
affect
people’s lives are made in juridically undefined places,
where public opinion
and national majorities hold little influence. On the other hand, this
very
scenario has made increasingly complex levels of organization, exchange
and
action possible, on the part of individuals, groups and social
organizations
- to an extent that would have
been unthinkable
even just a few years ago.
Technological
tools have made it possible to greatly potentialize the action of a
scant
handful of individuals. Such
a scenario
brings with it conflicts that are difficult to mediate, marked
by virtual,
electronic action and organization that are increasingly
de-territorialized,
and mobilized by a wide range of often unsuspecting social actors.
This
recent “empowerment” of
social and
individual actors is an element that has still to be subjected to more
intense
analysis and study within the social sciences.
Within
this scenario, and
in convergence with
the tendency present in other sectors of society including the economy,
a new
moment in the history of social movements emerges, involving action
through a
new type of organization which establishes networks of global outreach
and
articulation. This
becomes the most
efficient way to work against the grain of large scale organizations
and
corporations that have increasingly global power – beyond the
sphere of local
governments’ democratic control- in an environment in which
local institutions
are increasingly undermined by such actors.
Collective
action in a new
context.
The
possibility of quick, inexpensive and wide-reaching communication has
made the
Internet the main instrument that civil society organizations, social
movements
and citizens groups use for purposes of communication and articulation. The web has become a
fundamental public space
for the strengthening of social actors’ demands, and is put
to use to widen the
reach of their action and develop more efficient strategies of
struggle.
Bringing tens and even hundreds of organizations of different scales
and
cultural, linguistic and identitarian worlds together, through the
infra-structure of a worldwide network, they are able to provide an
efficient
and effective source of uniting voices of discontent in ways that
channel broad
and complex synergies via global action.
For the social and
collective actors who in
other times were scattered, unconnected or isolated, there is now the
possibility of concentrating their actions in the name of a common
cause, on
the basis of ever-expanding networks of solidarity.
New alliances and the exchange of
information and support between different
networks of social collectives can be observed, in which elements that
are held
in common can be explored. Thus, we are able to speak of networks
including
hundreds of entities that exchange information, form pressure groups
and provide
mutual support. These
networks are
incomparably larger than those that existed a scant tem years ago, when
people
began to speak of them.
The
basic raw
material used by this new form of organization is information that is
generated
and efficiently distributed. This
power
results from the growing ability to produce, reproduce, share and
disseminate
facts, ideas, values, world views and individual and collective
experiences
regarding interests, identities and beliefs –
and, as we should
add, all within a very short period of time.
This sharing of values occurs in ways that are increasingly
less
mediated and without direct interference from governments and
corporations.
Information-sharing
has a key role for the
construction of shared frameworks of meaning that is part of political
activity. It is
carried out by way of
alliances of local groups that are connected to an international
network. Such
networks exercise growing symbolic
influence on accountability. This
goes
on through the strengthening of information and counter-information,
the
alignment of strategies for action, sharing of goals and other types of
mutual
support.
This type of
action makes it possible to integrate or connect immense
and diversified networks through only a very few nodal points. The
complexity
of such connections has not yet been sufficiently studied, yet such
characteristics do probably represent a landmark in changing forms of
social
movement action. It
is undeniable that
we are witnessing very strong tendencies for change, particularly
regarding
forms of social movement organization and action.
Such networks, along with other known forms
of organization, are characterized by volunteer work, reciprocity and
horizontal models of communication and exchange.
There is little novelty in this. What draws
our attention is the fact that such elements have been enormously
potentialized through the use of information technologies.
Some characteristics of social movement activity.
Following this brief
description of changes in the forms of social movement activity, I
would like
to present an analytical summary of its main characteristics, relating
my
interpretation to some recent work by Giddens, Castells, Stuart Hall,
Melucci
and other authors who have written on social movements and identity.
1) The
proliferation and ramification of social
collectives. The scope and speed of new
information technologies has
allowed for a proliferation of civic organizations and social
collectivities,
as well as an efficient and strategic integration among them. Flowing basically from the
idealism and
volunteer spirit of their members, new forms of alliances and synergies
of
global scope emerge. Thus, there is a significant increase in forms of
mobilization, participation, interaction, access to information,
provision of
resources, individual affiliations and ramifications among social
movements
2) Networks
as horizontal and flexible. Organizations
tend to be increasingly horizontal, less hierarchical, more flexible,
with
multiple ties and connected to numerous micro-networks
or cells
that can be quickly activated. According
to Castells (1999:426), new social movements tend to be increasingly
characterized by “forms of organization and intervention that
are
de-centralized and integrated through networks
3) Coalition-building
tendency. Social
movements tend to act more and
more through coalition networks (Diani, 2003, Escobar, 2000) that are
global in
scope, based on common interests and depending on the communication
infra-structure provided by the Internet. Tendência
coalizacional.
4) Dynamic
and event- or goal-related existence.
These movements tend to be extremely dynamic in their
emergence and their
ability to attain certain goals, to cause impact and repercussion, and
to
mobilize around a particular political fact; similarly, they may also
rapidly
fall apart or disappear, due to a particular situation (an event that is over, an
objective reached or
failed).
5) Organizational
and material minimalism. Physical
headquarters become irrelevant. Fax, telephone and postal address take
on
secondary importance. The
possibility of
operating at a very low cost motivates individual affiliation, the
emergence of
new social movements and the linking of movements among themselves. .
6) The
universalism and particularism of causes.
Ideals may be of a universal or particularist nature. They may refer to one
desire or to a series
of aspirations of social collectivities that are very small and
specific (and
for that matter, geographically separate).
However, although tied to a specific cause or theme,
struggles may be
increasingly oriented in such a way that they are tied to a wider
scenario of
struggles that include principles of universal acceptance, such as
sustainable
development, human rights, people´s rights to
self-determination, the fight
against racism and other forms of discrimination, democracy, freedom of
expression,
etc
7) Great
ability for articulation and
efficiency. This permits the organization
of simultaneous protests
in different cities and countries, as well as the local articulation of
a
variety of groups of scattered demonstrators.
To the contrary of what many would assume, the convergence
of interests
is not limited to “virtual” expression.
It materializes in concrete actions as well. This is the case, for
example, of actions
taken by groups such as Move
On, No
Border, Oxfam, Confédération Paysanne, ATACC,
Okupa, among others that could be
listed.. Their geometry may be variable, concentrating and activating
their
ties and making use of a variety of strategies, as necessity dictates.
8) Strategies
based on shared ideologies lifted from local
contexts. Strategies
adopted
are lifted from local contexts and
flow
across spatial boundaries.They attempt to tie identities, goals,
ideologies and
shared world views. Identity and solidarity play fundamental roles in
the
formation of such networks. These
characteristics
are associated with what Castells has called “identities of
resistance”.
According to him, the latter pertain to “civil societies that
are enmeshed in
processes of desintegration”, in which identity becomes
an element of
communal resistance.” (1999: 25).
9) Multiple
identities/circulation of activists.
Networks promote the circulation of activists. One same activist can be
envolved with a
variety of causes and collective
actors; s/he may
participate in a variety of movements and even transmit demands through
the
different networks of participation (through identitarian
connections);
since the unity of its members may only be transitory or linked to a
specific
demand, it is not uncommon for one individual to participate in
different
social movements, sharing a common interest with people with whom in
other
aspects of life, hold very different beliefs, values and aspirations.
For Giddens,
self-identity is a fundamental
characteristic of “late modernity”.
According to him, in a scenario of growing connection
between the
“intentionality”
and
“extentionality”
of individuals, the
latter are able to negotiate a series of life styles and options,
building
their identity in the terms of supplied by their dialectical
interaction with
the global. This
network-based
circulation of activists that is carried out through multiple
identities finds
support in Hall´s (2004) thesis on the fragmentation of
identities as a
characteristic of the contemporary world.
From a different point of departure, Castells speaks of
the social
construction of identity, referring to “the identity of
projects” in which
“social actors, making use of whatever type of cultural
material they have at
hand, build new identitites). (Castells, 1999: 24). From his
perspective, the “identity
of projects” is related the construction of life projects
through the widening
of individuals’ identities and experiences, and in turn give
rise to the
emergence of new subjects.
(id., ib.:
26 )
10) The diffuse identity of social subjects. Anonymity and multiple identities are potentializing for forms of activism. It is also for this reason that it has become increasing difficult to deal with social movements´ issues of identity. The interests of individuals that are linked through networks are increasingly diverse, intersected and frequently even tenuous. Struggles are increasingly built less from individuals and more in terms of the construction of social subjects. This characteristic complexity of contemporary social movements was captured by Melucci, who argues that their structures are increasingly more difficult to be identified as collective actor, holding “increasingly indistinct shapes and variable densities”. (Melucci, 1996: 114)
Conclusion
Throughout
this text, I have sought to demonstrate the
existence of new forms and tendencies in social activism. The new
social
movements’ “appropriation”
of places and
spaces within the world wide web has contributed to the strengthening
of social
demands insofar as it offers certain types of organization, forms of
articulating actions and engaging in politics that did not exist
hitherto..
Demonstrations
receiving wide and diversified support and involving large scale
articulation
such as those that took place on the occasions of the world summit
meetings of
the G7, OMC, IMF, World Bank, and World Social Forum could not have
taken place
had it not been for the use of information and communication
technologies. In
all these cases it has been noted that, with
a certain independence from traditional means and mechanisms of social
control
and involving hundreds of us, members of groups and activists of all
types,
there has been an enormous flux of information circulating, resulting
in an
efficient articulation of means, resources and strategies for large
scale
mobilization.
These new
forms and instruments of organization have
enabled not only the constitution of but also the existence of new
political
entities. As we have described, various social actors have emerged,
formed
through the support they receive from smaller networks and
sub-networks, a type
of “dormant” structure of cells that can be
activated at any given moment,
according to a logic that is related to elements of identity, value and
ideology. It is a
scenario in which
multiple social identities, interests and ideas are articulated and
combined
with considerable dynamism around specific goals and objectives. The social movements that
are articulated in
this network have the ability to aggregate these “individual
identities”, which
are frequently anonymous and diffuse, activating the identitarian
elements of
solidarity.
In order to
confront the interests of powerful and large-scale social actors,
social
movements use information as their primary – and sometimes
only – resource.
Strategically disseminated and allied to more tradition forms of
articulation –
such as demonstrations, protests and worldwide campaigns –
information and
knowledge are able to effectively unleash processes of social change. Since information is but a
raw material that
can be transformed into an ideology, social movements are increasingly
more
oriented toward means of communication – whose power of
persuasion can be, at
times, much greater than the power of force – in order to
disseminated and
share values, world-views and experiences.
Through this
interpretation,
we can identify an intersection that is very favorable for the
development of
network connections between social movements.
In this regard, we should remember Tilly’s
(1978) notion of “repertoires
of collective action. Learned
through
political tradition, participation and media-based forms of
circulation, these
“repertoires” are responsible for the greater scope
and possibilities for
collective action. Through
this
approach, innovation, dissemination and incorporation of certain forms
of
collective action depend on the populations’ routines, the
experiences,
organizations and models of society to which they are exposed. With the growing
use of information and
communication technologies, these repertoires
are ever-growing.
Experiences, social models, values and signs are increasingly
disseminated,
confronted and shared, creating
a wide horizon of social and
symbolic transformation..
The tendency
for the greater part of social movements to be guided,
through the network, by universal values such as human and minority
rights,
freedom of speech, environmental preservation and so forth, is
consolidated, as
they thus claim their rights to the guarantees provided by the laws of
modern
democratic states – albeit in the interests of their
transgression.
These values, since they are increasingly
universal, create a strong sense of identification that facilitates
integration
at the axiological and symbolic level of social movements. style="" ">
The networks
of these social collectivities are woven
through the relationships, conflicts and social and political processes
that go
on in society, whose causes and consequences are linked in the increasingly
shared daily life of social actors..
These conflicts and processes
of change reverberate and are disseminated through telematic networks
until
they encompass people’s daily lives and
“conquer” their minds.
Actions geared toward social change are
carried out within new boundaries in which interaction, intention,
connection,
identity and action carry out increasingly fundamental roles, giving
social
actors a scope of influence that is constantly expanding and creating
an
environment that is favorable for new forms of collective action.
Attention
should be drawn to the fact that such
changes in the structure and forms of social movement activities is
still in an
initial stage. There is still a wide horizon of change ahead, if we
consider
the persisting lack of connection to many parts of the world, digital
illiteracy or the difficulties and the predominance of middle class
segments in
such organizations and, above all, because we are dealing with
transformations
that for the most part are coming from a younger generation that is yet
to
assume more prominent positions in society.
Bibliography
Alexander, Jeffrey C. (1998)
“Ação Coletiva,
Cultura e Sociedade Civil –
Secularização, atualização,
inversão, revisão e
deslocamento do modelo clássico dos movimentos
sociais”. Rev.
Brasileira de
Ciências Sociais , n. 37,
vol. 13. Online:
<http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-69091998000200001&lng=en&nrm
=iso&tlng=pt>
(Consulta em 09/09/2004).
Castells, Manuel (1999). A
Era da Informação:
Economia, Sociedade e Cultura. Vol. II: O Poder da
Identidade. São
Paulo: Paz e Terra.
_____ (2000). A Era da
Informação: Economia, Sociedade e Cultura. Vol.
II:
A Sociedade em Rede. São Paulo: Paz e Terra.
Diani, Mario (2003).
"'Leaders' Or Brokers? Positions and Influence in Social Movement
Networks" in Diani, Mario & McAdam, Doug
(Eds.) Social
Movements and Networks -Relational Approaches to Collective Action.
Oxford:
Oxford Univ. Press.
Escobar, Arturo (2000). "Notes on Networks and Anti-Globalization Social Movements" Presented at 2000 Annual American Anthropological Association Meeting, November 2000, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.
Hall, Stuart (2004). A Identidade Cultural na Pós-modernidade. Rio de Janeiro: DP&A.
Held, David (1997). La Democracia y El Orden Global – Del Estado Moderno al Gobierno Cosmopolita, Paidós, Barcelona. Orig.: Democracy and Social Order: From the Modern State to Cosmopolitan Governance. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1994.
Keck, Margaret & Sikkink, Kathryn (1998). Activists Beyond Borders. Advocacy Networks in International Politics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Melucci,
Alberto (1999). Acción
Colectiva, Vida Cotidiana y Democracia.México
D.F: El Colegio.
_____ (1996). Challenging Codes - Collective Action in the Information Age. sCambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pasquino, Gianfranco (1994) “Movimentos Sociais”, in Bobbio, N; Pasquino, G; Matteucci (Eds) Dicionário de Política. Vol. 2, pp. 787-92. Brasília: Ed. UnB.
Smith,
J.; Chatfield, C; & Pagnucco, R. (1997). “Social
Movements
and World Politics. A Theoretical Framework.” In Smith, J.;
Chatfield, C; &
Pagnucco, R. (eds), Transnational Social Movements and Global
Politics. Syracuse:
Syracuse University Press.
Tarrow, Sidney (1997). El poder en
movimiento. Los movimientos sociales,
la acción colectiva y la política. Madrid: Alianza
Editorial. Orig.: Power in Movement: Social Movements,
Collective Action and
Mass Politics in the Modern State. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Tilly, Charles (1978). From Mobilization to Revolution. Reading, Mass., Addison-Wesley.
Touraine,
A.
(1995). La producción de la sociedad.
México, IISUNAM.