Doug and Michael have pointed out the central issue.
After 1964 the Political Right built a series of social movements that pulled the Republican Party toward their POV. They operated on both the state and national level. They developed new "frames" to make their arguments more attractive, but frames are not enough.
These are the basic building blocks of a successful social movement:
*
A discontented group of politicized persons who share the perception that they have common grievances they want society to address;
*
A powerful and lucid ideological vision linked to strategies and tactics that have some reasonable chance of success;
*
The recruitment of people into the movement through pre-existing social, political, and cultural networks;
*
A core group of trusted strategic leaders and local activists who effectively mobilize, organize, educate, and communicate with the politicized mass base;
*
The efficient mobilization of resources that are available, or can be developed, to assist the movement to meet its goals;
*
An institutional infrastructure integrating political coordination, research and policy think tanks, training centers, conferences, and alternative media.
*
Opportunities in the larger political and social scene that can be exploited by movement leaders and activists;
*
The skillful framing of ideas and slogans for multiple audiences such as leaders, members, potential recruits, policymakers, and the general public.
*
An attractive movement culture that creates a sense of community through mass rituals, celebrations, music, drama, poetry, art, and narrative stories about past victories, current struggles, and future successes.
*
The ability of recruits to craft a coherent and functional identity as a movement participant.
(This list is based on the work of Goffman, Zald, McCarthy, Meyer, Gamson, Snow, McAdam, Benford, Klandermans, Johnston, Ewick, Silbey, Polletta, and many other scholars)
http://www.publiceye.org/action/movement.html
-Chip
________________________________
From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org on behalf of Michael Hoover Sent: Fri 3/24/2006 12:53 PM To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] doom
>>> dhenwood at panix.com 03/22/06 10:40 AM >>>
I'm amazed that Nathan thinks that the defeat in California is enough
reason to give up on the big stuff and do the "fair share" campaigns
instead. What happened to learning from your defeat and trying again?
If the right had given up after Goldwater's defeat in 1964, we'd
never have had Reagan as president.
Doug
<<<<<<>>>>>
i've long maintained - and have probably expressed such on this list - there has been general failure/unwillingness to address 'the other' 60s...
as for '64, radical right wasn't dispirited by goldwater's defeat, activists were enthused by it, about 2 million people contributed to goldwater campaign, up from about 40,000 that contributed to nixon in '60, radical right controlled stronger southern republican party, such activists laid groundwork for what would become the 'southern strategy', and a few were even elected to congress during this period...
these young conservatives were zealots, they dug political fighting, more importantly, the built a framework of conservative organizations that were ideologically committed to conservatism rather than republican party and that eschewed politics of compromise and conciliation... mh
___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/ms-tnef Size: 7512 bytes Desc: not available URL: <../attachments/20060324/d5eb41c6/attachment.bin>