Search

The authors ask descriptive questions concerning the relationship between social movement organizations (SMOs) and the state. Which movement’s SMOs are consulted the most by the state? Do only a few “spokes-organizations” speak for the whole of movements? Has the state increasingly consulted SMOs over time? Do the movements consulted most by the state advise only a few state venues? The authors present and describe a new publicly available data set covering 2,593 SMOs testifying at any of the 87,249 public congressional hearings held during the twentieth century. Testimony is highly concentrated across movements, with just four movements giving 64 percent of the testimony before Congress. A very few “spokes-organizations” testify far more often than typical SMOs. The SMO congressional testimony diversified over the twentieth century from primarily “old” movements such as Labor to include “new” movements such as the Environmental movement. The movements that testified most often did so before a broader range of congressional committees.

Social movements are constantly evolving. Protest activity waxes and wanes as movements suffer through prolonged periods of frustration, win occasional gains, and turn to new goals and issues. While theoretical models of protest activity are often sensitive to this reality, empirical models typically treat these explanations as time-invariant, rather than situated in specific moments in movements’ histories. Quite simply, we suspect that the effect of important predictors of movement activity, notably access to resources, political opportunities, repression, and competition, varies depending on the specific moment in the movement’s life course. We explore this possibility through a detailed analysis of three main periods of the American Civil Rights movement: (1) the movement’s initial success (1960–1968), its subsequent demobilization (1968–1977), and its institutionalization (1978–1995). Our analysis builds on limited work arguing for greater sensitivity to a movement’s life course when explaining protest activity. We find that the type of organizational resources that shape mobilization varies across periods, and support for prior work showing that the concurrent push and pull of institutionalization and radicalization led to demobilization. Finally, we find that coalition work motivated protest during its period of institutionalization. We conclude by discussing the theoretical and empirical implications of these findings.

The prospect of using the Internet and other Big Data methods to construct event data promises to transform the field but is stymied by the lack of a coherent strategy for addressing the problem of selection. Past studies have shown that event data have significant selection problems. In terms of conventional standards of representativeness, all event data have some unknown level of selection no matter how many sources are included. We summarize recent studies of news selection and outline a strategy for reducing the risks of possible selection bias, including techniques for generating multisource event inventories, estimating larger populations, and controlling for nonrandomness. These build on a relativistic strategy for addressing event selection and the recognition that no event data set can ever be declared completely free of selection bias.

Previous analyses of the relationship between dissent and repression have turned up mixed, and often conflicting, results. Although research on the effect of repression on dissent has been inconsistent, it becomes obvious that time and country variation does matter: the effects of dissent and repression do not occur in a social vacuum. Our analyses seek to determine what country-level contextual variables influence levels of nonviolent and violent dissent, as well as nonviolent and violent repression. We include a battery of variables describing domestic economic and political conditions, sociodemographics, and global linkages. We test specific hypotheses about these potential determinants of various forms of dissent and repression by using data on 530 event-weeks of the period 1994-2004 across 97 countries. We find that proximity to the center of the world polity network and capacity for state terror have an effect on both dissent and repression, and international, political, and economic factors have an...

This course provides an undergraduate level introduction to the study of youth political socialization and political activism. Young people are the backbone of most social movements from the Civil Rights and anti-Vietnam War movements to more contemporary examples like Black Lives Matter, #Occupy, and the anti-gun violence movement. The first half of the course presents an overview of theories of youth political socialization, political participation, and their role in social movements. The course specifically explores concerns about the state of youth political participation and the realities of participation, theories regarding how youth are socialized to participate in politics (and the impediments to participation), the history of youth in social movements (specifically why youth and college campuses are so important). The second half builds on this structure to review areas where youth are bringing new energy to political participation. The syllabus includes discussion in how youth have updated tactics, continue to redefine what counts as political, and incorporate new (intersectionality) and old (economic inequality) concerns into movements. The course is built around a midterm and final exam, as well as a research paper on a youth-oriented social movement that is broken up into several smaller "proposals" throughout the semester. Students are also assessed on their participation in class discussion over the substantive issues. The course serves as a point of connection between courses on youth and society, political sociology, political communication, and social movements.