Are social movements truly social? The prosocial and antisocial outcomes of social movements

Abstract

A growing body of research demonstrates that U.S. politics has become increasingly polarized over the past few decades. In these polarized times, what potential roles might social movements play in bridging divides between, or perhaps further dividing, people across a variety of political and social groups? In this article, we propose a research agenda for social movement studies focused on the prosocial and antisocial outcomes of social movements. Although scholars commonly frame their work on the consequences of social movements in terms of social movements' political, economic, cultural, and biographical outcomes, we suggest a focus on two categories of social movement outcomes (prosocial and antisocial outcomes) that cut across prior theoretical categories, and we show how an emerging body of scholarship has documented such outcomes at micro, meso, and macro levels of analysis. We also consider how emerging scholarship has addressed the sociological question about the conditions under which social movements produce prosocial versus antisocial outcomes. As we argue, attention to prosocial and antisocial outcomes of social movements holds both theoretical implications for social movement research and practical implications for social movements navigating the United States' political and social divides.

The Making of a Movement: An Intergenerational Mobilization Model of the Nonviolent Nashville Civil Rights Movement

“…Our article contributes to the literature on bridge building in social movements as well (e.g., Coley 2014;Coley et al 2020;Gawerc 2020;Isaac and Christiansen 2002;Mayer 2009;Robnett 1996;Snarr 2009), addressing the factors that encourage intergenerational solidarity within social movements. The Nashville movement was an instance of planned, intergenerational movement mobilization.…”

“…First, we take seriously the idea that many social movements must tend to intramovement divisions related to age, an attribute rarely considered in this literature (but see Cornfield 1989Cornfield , 2015Whittier 2018). Previous literature instead highlights the role of bridging organizations and bridge leaders in bridging intramovement divides and tensions related to race, national origin, social class, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, religious identity, and other forms of social difference (e.g., Coley 2014;Coley et al 2020;Gawerc 2020;Isaac and Christiansen 2002;Mayer 2009;Robnett 1996;Snarr 2009). Our multistage mobilization model addresses the lack of attention to age-related divides by highlighting distinct roles of different age generations in historically and qualitatively distinct stages of mobilization.…”

The Algorithmic Management of Polarization and Violence on Social Media

“…al, 2019). Sociologists investigate whether a social movement brings people together or tears them apart (Coley, Raynes and Das, 2020). Violence is a particularly extreme and destructive type of conflict, with lasting consequences; nonetheless philosophers have argued for millennia over the possibility of a "just war."…”