Global Justice and OWS: Movement Connections

Hayduk, Ron

doi:10.1080/08854300.2012.686276

Cited by 13 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Leadership overlaps occurred between the GJM and the OWS, illustrated by the crossmovement organizing of OWS leaders (Hayduk 2012;Roberts 2012 Additionally, organizations affiliated with the GJM and individuals sympathetic to the grievances of the GJM were involved in helping to organize advertising and funding for OWS, especially at the onset. One of the largest donors to OWS was Robert Halper, former chairman of the New York Mercantile Exchange and 'a self-described member of the nation's richest 1percent who made his fortune trading futures and options' (McGrath Goodman 2011).…”

Section: Gjm Supporters Remobilized Into Owsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…G. E. de Vries-Jordan unlike the GJM, Occupy movements tended to focus on austerity politics domestically as opposed to structural adjustment policies internationally, both in Europe and the United States (Interview 1). Key frames in OWS protests included pursuing global justice, addressing income inequality, and remediating global democratic deficits, frames which were rooted squarely in the grievances of the GJM (Ayres 2004;Hayduk 2012;Steger and Wilson 2012). British Occupiers highlighted the pursuit of global economic justice and efforts to hold governments and banks accountable for the global economic crisis (Edwards 2011).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Global Justice Movement and Occupy Wall Street: spillover, spillout, or coalescence?

Vries-Jordan¹

2014

Global Discourse

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article argues that a symbiotic coalescence has emerged between the Global Justice Movement (GJM) and Occupy Wall Street (OWS), rather than a spillover or spillout from the GJM to OWS. News coverage concerning GJM and OWS protests and interviews with scholars who have studied or participated in these movements are used to explore overlapping actors, frames, targets, and tactical repertoires as well as dynamics in protest mobilization levels. I conclude that a symbiotic coalescence emerged between the GJM and OWS. Although the coalescence was mutually beneficial to both movements, OWS benefited more from these cross-movement ties than the GJM. Further, the demobilization of the GJM preceded the onset of OWS. The findings are consistent with coalescence arguments and inconsistent with spillover or spillout arguments. OWS continues to maintain a largely untapped network of participants, which can be remobilized at politically opportune moments for new waves of social justice activism.

show abstract

Section: Gjm Supporters Remobilized Into Owsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Global Justice Movement and Occupy Wall Street: spillover, spillout, or coalescence?

Vries-Jordan¹

2014

Global Discourse

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite these tensions, the emphasis on process and praxis rather than outcomes can transcend limitations; listening, openness, and even a “giving up” (Chatterton, 2006) of activism can allow for discrete interests and identities to come together. Furthermore, contemporary scholarship on such movements often acknowledges small-scale acts of contestation within the scale of the city (Kuünkel and Mayer, 2012), only then to link them to global networks of activism (Hayduk, 2012; Leontidou, 2010). Yet many of these struggles are not only inherently local, but also influence and effect institutional change, despite their commitment to autonomy.…”

Section: Urban Activism Political Imaginaries and The Case Of Spainmentioning

confidence: 99%

Indignation and inclusion: Activism, difference, and emergent urban politics in postcrash Madrid

Gonick

2015

Environ Plan D

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How to create radical democracy in a moment of crisis and austerity? On the one hand, geographies of autonomy, solidarity, and resistance can offer hope, promise, and utopian anticapitalist alternatives for future action. On the other hand, agonistic initiatives that discard consensus in favor of conflictive engagement with institutions of state rule can allow for pluralism and the acceptance of difference. Perhaps, however, actually existing democracy can be achieved through an emphasis on process that bridges both activist ideologies. Looking to competing forms of activism in Madrid’s housing movement, I identify two strands of action—radical autonomy versus agonistic engagement. Despite their profound disjunctures, however, I argue these strands complement each other to ultimately experience convergence, which in turn contributes to the flourishing of new political initiatives. Within this convergence, feminist perspectives attuned to difference have been crucial in forcing transformation through existing democratic structures. The resulting political projects engage with mechanisms of state rule while drawing on practices and procedures from autonomous struggles to elaborate frameworks for institutional change. In the process, I demonstrate the possibility of collaboration between competing modes of activism—often conceived as incommensurate—in the broader quest for emancipation from neoliberal state rule.

show abstract

“…From Occupy in the United States and anti‐austerity movements in Europe, to the “Arab Spring,” to uprisings in Turkey, Brazil, and beyond, millions of people have organized collectively to challenge existing socioeconomic relations and to improve their life situations. Although they have met with decidedly mixed results, these protests have attracted global attention, pushed new issues onto the political agenda, and in some cases have managed to reshape the political landscape in important ways (Berkhout and Jansen ; Hayduk ; Mason ; Shihade et al ).…”

Section: Class Identity Today: Does It Still Matter?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Class Formation and Class Identity: Birth, Death, and Possibilities for Renewal

Eidlin

2014

Sociology Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While social class served as a powerful organizing identity for much of the 19th and 20th centuries, many doubt its contemporary relevance. This article examines the formation and development of theories of class identity over the past century. From a debate largely among Marxists in the early 20th century about the conditions under which the working class will mobilize to defend its interestsmoving from a "class in itself" to a "class for itself"the question of the relationship between individuals' class position, social interests, and political mobilization attracted greater attention among social scientists following World War II. However, postwar socioeconomic transformations led some to argue for the "death of class" as a central organizing principle for modern social and political life. While others countered that class identities remained relevant, the sharp decline in class-based organization in the late 20th century led scholars to develop more nuanced understandings of the relationship between individuals' class position and collective identities. Although current scholarship shows that there is no natural translation of class identities into collective action, the reality of growing socioeconomic inequality, along with the resurgence of social and political mobilizations to contest that growth, suggests that class identities retain the capacity to unite.

show abstract

Global Justice and OWS: Movement Connections

Cited by 13 publications

References 0 publications

The Global Justice Movement and Occupy Wall Street: spillover, spillout, or coalescence?

The Global Justice Movement and Occupy Wall Street: spillover, spillout, or coalescence?

Indignation and inclusion: Activism, difference, and emergent urban politics in postcrash Madrid

Class Formation and Class Identity: Birth, Death, and Possibilities for Renewal

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About