Reform or Radicalism: Left Social Movements from the Battle of Seattle to Occupy Wall Street

Abstract

We examine two recent cases of relative Left success -the Battle of Seattle and OccupyWall Street -and argue that in each case an effective dynamism between radical and reform wings drove gains. This analysis is not meant to deny political difference and hawk false unity. Instead we want to challenge the luxury of mutual dismissal with the actually existing benefits of movement dynamism. By dynamism we mean contributions arising from different activist wings and productively interacting to increase overall movement power. Our ultimate claim is that the North American Left will yield greater success by becoming more self-conscious about the concrete benefits of movement dynamism. 6 See Herbert Haines, Black Radicals and the Civil Rights Mainstream, 1954-1970 (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1988. While influenced by Political Process Theory, primarily the work of Doug McAdam, Haines' sustained accounting of radical contributions to larger social change processes distinguishes his work in the field. This said Haines is primarily interested in how radicals affect the success or failure of more moderate groups. In this regard he shares an ultimate focus on reform efforts with political process theorists. 7

Keir Milburn: Generation Left

“…) Edustuksellinen käänne, nimenomaisesti millenniaalien kautta artikuloituna, on havainnollistava suhteessa muutokseen vuoden 2011 spontaaniin ja puoluevastaiseen liikehdintään. Vuoden 2011 kapitalisminvastaisessa liikehdinnässä oli myös jatkumoita Sukupolvi X:n anarkismista ja autonomisilta liikkeiltä ammentava valtiovastaisuudesta, jossa korostetaan suoraa toimintaa ja radikalismia institutionaalisen reformistisen politiikan sijaan (Rowe ja Myles 2014). Siten se ei nähdäkseni ollut vielä leimallisesti millenniaalien kautta artikuloitu yhteiskunnallinen liike.…”

Assembling the opposition: Organizing struggles against neoliberalism and educational insecurity

“…181–182). Similarly, social movement scholars James Rowe and Myles Carroll challenge the idea that reform and radicalism are necessarily incommensurable, suggesting we seek a more “effective dynamism between radical and reformers” in struggles for social transformation (Rowe and Carroll, 2014, p. 149). “[T]he distinction between systemic transformation (radicalism) and systemic repair (reform),” they argue, “softens in the heat of political struggle even as important political differences remain” (Rowe and Carroll, 2014, p. 154).…”

Scholar-Activist Terrain in Canada and Ireland

“…For some, the most effective methods of advancing social justice are the ones that challenge and modify, but do not necessarily attempt to upend, 'the system' (e.g., Pain & Francis, 2003;Shade, 2011;Smeltzer, 2012), whereas others have chosen to engage in activities that actively seek to abolish the dominant political and economic framework (e.g., Cloud, 2011;Hale, 2008James & Gordon, 2008Piven, 2010). These positions represent familiar reformist versus revolutionary/radical approaches to fomenting change (e.g., Croteau, 2005;Luxemburg, 2007;Panitch, 2008;Young & Schwartz, 2012); however, many individuals occupy viewpoints in the middle of the spectrum (e.g., Rowe & Carroll, 2014) and they alter their approach depending on myriad factors, including the issue at hand, personal obligations, and professional commitments.…”