This article proposes and argues for the importance of a distinction between "low-" and "high-risk/cost activism" and outlines a model of recruitment to the latter. The model emphasizes the importance of both structural and individual motivational factors in high-risk! cost activism; contending that an intense ideological identification with the values of the movement disposes the individual toward participation, while a prior history of activism and integration into supportive networks acts as the structural "pull" encouraging the individual to make good on his or her strongly held beliefs. The utility of the model is then analyzed in relation to a single instance of high-risk/cost activism: the 1964 Freedom Summer project. Data from project applications for 720 persons who actually went to Mississippi, as well as from 241 "no shows," are used to explain the applicants' chances of participation in terms of various factors. The results of this analysis generally confirm the importance of mi- crostructural factors in recruitment to the campaign. Participants were distinguished from withdrawals primarily on the basis of their (a) greater number of organizational affiliations, (b) higher levels of prior civil rights activity, and (c) stronger and more extensive ties to other participants.
Wojtek
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 2:46 PM, shag carpet bomb <shag at cleandraws.com> wrote:
> actually2, the people who stuck with FS and were radicalized by it
> were people who had a very high opinion of the u.s. and who were
> shocked by what they learned during that summer.
>
>
>> actually, i mistyped my characterization of the thesis doug has
>> espoused: people don't get politically active when they're
>> economically downtrodden, feeling insecure, etc. rather, history has
>> shown a rising tide of activism during economic good times. I was
>> wondering if the latest protest was an example of one emerging during
>> economic hard times...
>>
>> meanwhile, I think Carrol is right to say that it's a lot of people
>> looking for a movement. it sickens me to watch the vultures move in -
>> the unions, moveon, etc.
>>
>> as for McAdam, I can't doublecheck right now, but IIRC, the thesis was
>> that people who stuck with FS were people who had a very high opinion
>> of how great the u.s. was.
>>
>> that's a theory about why they got involved to being with.
>>
>> the rest of the theory is about how this one event, FS, created the
>> resources - people, ideas, commitment, connections, contact lists,
>> human relationships, etc. - that would be mobilized in the women's
>> movement, the free speech movement, gay liberation, etc. He traces how
>> the people at the center of those movement were part of FS and how
>> they mobilized the resources they created during that experience and
>> deployed them to spur on other movements.
>>> shag: "Or do we go with McAdam's thesis in Freedom Summer? That
>>> people
>>> get
>>> pissed off when their expectations have been raised and then the
>>> politicians who've been elected to meet those expectations fail
>>> miserably at doing so."
>>>
>>> [WS:] That is the J-curve theory of movements, no?
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Chowning_Davies
>>>
>>> If memory serves McAdam & Co. argued that personal connection to
>>> movement participants are better predictors of participation than
>>> the
>>> state of mind (i.e. being dissatisfied or agreeing with movement's
>>> ideals.)
>>>
>>> As I see it, you need both. J curve theory may explain growing
>>> dissatisfaction even as living conditions improve, but it does not
>>> explain who joins a movement addressing that dissatisfaction.
>>> Personal connections do.
>>>
>>>
>>> Wojtek
>>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 11:22 AM, shag carpet bomb
>>> <shag at cleandraws.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Ok, so the social movement thesis bandied about here has been that
>>>> people are move apt to get pissed off and demonstrate about their
>>>> anger during economically good times.
>>>>
>>>> Does OWS contradict this?
>>>>
>>>> Or do we go with McAdam's thesis in Freedom Summer? That people get
>>>> pissed off when their expectations have been raised and then the
>>>> politicians who've been elected to meet those expectations fail
>>>> miserably at doing so.
>>>>
>>>> shag
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> http://cleandraws.com
>>>> Wear Clean Draws
>>>> ('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ___________________________________
>>>> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>>>>
>>> ___________________________________
>>> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> http://cleandraws.com
>> Wear Clean Draws
>> ('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)
>>
>>
>> ___________________________________
>> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>>
>
>
> --
> http://cleandraws.com
> Wear Clean Draws
> ('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>