Managing Democracy in Social Movement Organizations

Abstract

Leaders are crucial to social movement mobilization and maintenance. They often experience conflict between a value for inclusive engagement and a sense that they are moving efficiently toward their organizations' goals. This study draws on a multisite ethnography to suggest two mechanisms through which leaders may resolve this conflict: staging (manipulating organizational procedures) and scripting (using language to reinforce these procedures). Resolving tension in this way often leaves the leader in control of organizational processes and outcomes, and has the unintended effect of stifling the actual process of democratic participation. This study emphasizes the culturally embedded inertia of the democratic ideal and highlights a particular set of tactics for democracy management. It is proposed that these mechanisms might be helpfully applied to a growing literature on inclusive engagement in contemporary associational forms as well as a range of other institutional contexts.KEY WORDS: Democracy, culture, norms, oligarchy, organizations, inequality, strategy Organization is often thought to be a process that terminates in elite control. Yet leaders of small social movement groups are often torn between institutionally embedded demands for organizational efficiency and culturally embedded values for inclusive engagement. Social movement scholars note a steady emphasis on inclusion and consensus in the groups they study (Ferree & Martin, 1995;Polletta, 2002Polletta, , 2006. Groups preferring inclusive strategies often lack political and economic resources, relying instead on the strength of their claims and the validity of their organizational processes to establish and maintain legitimacy (Rothschild & Russell, 1986). However, rising expectations -from both individual members and the public -pressure most organizations to demonstrate efficiency (Meyer & Rowan, 1977).I draw on ethnographic fieldwork to suggest that movement and organization leaders may experience countervailing pressure between a culturally embedded value for inclusive engagement and institutionally embedded demands for organizational efficiency. Although this sort of tension was popularized decades ago (Meyer & Rowan, 1977), most of the work in intervening years has focused on oligarchy in non-bureaucratic organizations (Hallett, 2010;Leach, 2005). Ethnographic fieldwork thus provides an opportunity to better specify the ways broader cultural values shape group contexts, which in turn shape what is locally possible (Eliasoph & Lichterman, 2003).

The politics and practices of intersectional prefiguration in social movements: The case of Sisters Uncut

“…Writing specifically about prefigurative movements, Maeckelbergh argues, ‘horizontality is believed by many movement actors to be the best way to create equality … horizontality means actively creating practices that continuously challenge inequalities – both structural and inter-personal’ (Maeckelbergh, 2011, p. 10). Yet as mentioned earlier, scholars studying contemporary prefigurative movements have shown that these movements are failing to tackle existing inequalities and patterns of exclusion (Athanasiou, 2014; Choi-Fitzpatrick, 2015; Gamez Fuentes, 2015). Given our focus on how prefigurative movements not only acknowledge but also tackle the reproduction of inequalities in group spaces and our process-centred approach (Choo & Ferree, 2010), we now turn to examine how activists translate intersectional prefiguration into practice.…”

“…While accepting that point, our objective in this article is to examine how, in selfidentified prefigurative groups, where there is an explicit emphasis on enacting a different kind of politics and practice (i.e., non-hierarchical, utopian), both within the group and beyond, structural inequalities persist and how these are acknowledged and addressed. This is important as studies of recent prefigurative movements demonstrate, despite claims of inclusivity and the adoption of horizontal procedures and structures, such movements continue to reproduce inequalities and exclusionary practices found in society, as a result of which the voices and demands of women, as well as racial and ethnic minorities, become marginalised in organisational spaces limiting their ability to shape agendas of action (Athanasiou, 2014;Campbell, 2011;Choi-Fitzpatrick, 2015;Gamez Fuentes, 2015;Potuouglu-Cook, 2015). For instance, despite the claims that the Occupy movement was structured to 'give voice' to underrepresented people (Vallee, 2017), this was not necessarily achieved in practice.…”

“…For instance, despite the claims that the Occupy movement was structured to ‘give voice’ to underrepresented people (Vallee, 2017), this was not necessarily achieved in practice. Campbell and Choi-Fitzpatrick discuss the persistence of white privilege (Campbell, 2011) and the marginalisation of African American and Latino participants in Occupy Wall Street (Choi-Fitzpatrick, 2015) and elsewhere one of the authors has examined similar tensions in Occupy London (Ishkanian & Ali, 2018). Exclusionary practices were not limited to Occupy; Tadros shows the constraints on women’s participation in Tahrir Square, while Martinez Palacios and Gamez Fuentes illustrate how women’s voices and demands in the Spanish 15M movement were marginalised and silenced, and Potuoğlu-Cook examines exclusionary practices in Gezi Park (Martinez Palacios, 2015; Potuoğlu-Cook, 2015; Tadros, 2015).…”

“La forma sigue a la función”. Organizaciones Parciales de Movimientos Sociales para la realización prefigurativa del cambio

“…Los estudiosos del movimiento social recién empezaron a mostrar más interés en las organizaciones de los movimientos sociales. Los principales temas de investigación han sido las estructuras internas y los procesos de decisiones (Della Porta et al, 2009;Leach, 2009;Kreiss, 2014;Polletta, 2002;Maeckelbergh, 2012;Choi-Fitzpatrick, 2014;Polletta, 2005), liderazgo y jerarquía (Milam y Heath, 2014;Sutherland et al, 2013;Spicer y Böhm, 2007;Briscoe y Safford, 2008;Western, 2014), conflictos (Laamanen y den Hond, 2015; Maeckelbergh, 2012), y las rutinas cotidianas (Glass, 2010;Tilly, 1995). Las contribuciones relacionadas con la teoría organizacional suelen referirse al concepto de organizaciones prefigurativas.…”

What does democracy mean? Activist views and practices in Athens, Cairo, London and Moscow

“…Two exceptions are Choi-Fitzpatrick, who argues that despite the "appearance of inclusive engagement" the voices of African American and Latino participants were "often not heard" in recent social justice and democracy movements in the US, while the "Anglo participants" dominated the programme and conversations; and Martinez Palacios, who finds that the participation of women was restricted in practice in the Spanish 15M movement. 40 Likewise, we urge a more critical examination which examines the intersectionality within movements. Movements often claim to be inclusive and yet, upon investigation we discovered that age, class, gender, race, and religion can affect organizing and mobilizing within movements.…”