Comparative Political Behavior:  Social Movements and Revolutions

Political Science 552 -- Fall 2002

 

Monday 1:00-4:00 p.m.

 

 

Prof. Lee Ann Banaszak                                   Office Hours: W 1:30-4:30 p.m.

210 Sparks                                                           and by appointment

Phone: 865-6573                                            E-Mail:  lab14@psu.edu          

 

 

Course Description. 

 

This course will explore the nature of social movements and revolutions.  We will look at the major theories that sociologists and political scientists have created to explain the development and outcomes of social movements and revolutions.  How do we explain why people participate in revolutions or social movements?  Why is it that some people never revolt although observers would say they are as bad off as others that do?  What sorts of factors determine the tactics people will use once they decide something must be done?  Can governments repress revolutions or social movements?  What determines whether a social movement or revolution is successful?

In examining these questions we will read theoretical works, quantitative studies comparing many different social movements or revolutions and case studies of particular social movements and revolutions.  By the end of this course, you should have a good grasp of the theoretical debates about social movements, the methods which have been used to study revolutions and social movements, and you will have cursory knowledge of several different revolutions and social movements ranging from the Chinese Tiananmen movement to the American Civil Rights Movement.

 

 

Required Readings.

 

Keck, Margaret and Kathryn Sikkink.  1998.  Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics.  Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

McAdam, Douglas.  1988.  Freedom Summer.  Oxford University Press: Oxford.

Tarrow, Sidney.  1998.  Power in Movement. 2nd Edition.  Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.

Skocpol, Theda.  1979.  States and Social Revolutions.  Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.

Zhao, Dingxin.  2001.  The Power of Tiananmen: State-Society Relations and the 1989 Beijing Student Movement.  University of Chicago Press:  Chicago.

Also available at the bookstore is:

McAdam, Douglas; McCarthy, John; and Mayer Zald.  1996.  Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements.  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

We will also be reading selections from books and numerous articles.  I have some copies that I can make available to students, and we will discuss the distribution of articles on the first day of class.  

 

Course Requirements and Grades.

 

Student Responsibilities:  The class will meet Monday from 1:00 to 4:00 p.m.  This course will be in seminar format which means that each individual student is responsible for completing the readings prior to the class meetings, and for contributing to the discussion of the material.  For this reason, participation in class discussion is a significant portion of your final grade, and the thought papers will be due prior to the seminar.

 

Grades: Grades will be determined using the following criteria: 

 

            a)  class participation is worth 15% of your total grade.  In order to get above a B grade in class participation, you must participate regularly in the class discussions.

 

            b)  8 thought papers on the readings (for a total of 20% of your grade).  See the description of thought papers below.

 

            c)  one mid-semester comprehensive-style exam worth 25% of your grade.  This exam will contain 4 essay questions.  You will choose 2 of these essay questions to answer in the three hour period. 

 

            d) one research proposal paper and proposal presentation worth 35% of your grade.  These papers are due Friday, November 29th by 4:00 p.m.  Because papers will be distributed to fellow students, late papers will be penalized!! 

 

e) written comments on other students’ research proposals.  You will be graded on the care and clarity of your reviews.  Your job as a proposal evaluator is worth or 5% of your grade.

 

 

 

Thought papers

 

Individuals will be placed in group A or B.  Readings in the syllabus are marked with an A or B and individuals in that group are required to turn in a review of those readings by 9:00 AM on the Monday before class.  No late reviews will be accepted. 

These thought papers should be approximately 1 typewritten page but certainly no longer than 2 typewritten pages.  They are designed to facilitate class discussion and assure a careful reading of the day's assignments.  They will be utilized to initiate and steer class discussion.  Therefore, be prepared to explain your thought paper to the class.  For this reason, you will want to keep your own copy of your thought papers.

Thought papers should not just describe what is in the readings.  Instead they should analyze the works, which means you may critique the works, agree or disagree with the main arguments (giving some argument to support your opinion), or interpret them in light of other works you have read in the course or current events.   A good thought paper will provide some insight into the readings by showing how it is connected to the other literature on social movements, by discussing theoretical or methodological flaws and achievements, or by analyzing the usefulness of the theoretical or methodological approach in understanding other events.

Note that there are 10 days assigned to each letter in the syllabus.  This means that each person may skip two reviews.  Use this possibility wisely because you may not turn these reviews in late or make up reviews at a later date.

 

The Research Proposal

 

Research proposals are an important part of our work as scholars.  As we seek funding for a research project we are often asked to provide a description of our research plans that explains its significance and the methods we plan to use to a wide audience of scholars.  Research proposals typically include an explanation of the research question (or hypothesis), the significance of this question to the larger subfield, and a plan of how you will study this question.  That plan should include discussions of what sort of data you will use, how you will collect or find these data, and how exactly you will measure the important concepts involved in answering your research question. 

The research assignment in this class is to write such a proposal.  You are limited to twenty double-spaced pages of text (not including bibliography).  Your research proposals should be written AS IF you were going to complete the research.  That means you must be able to carry out the research you propose.  For example, you should not propose interviewing participants in the student movement in China, if you do not speak Chinese. 

Your written proposal will be judged as would grants on the relevance of the basic question to the field, and the soundness and quality of the research design.  As part of the research proposal you must present your proposal to the class on and answer questions from your fellow students.  Your presentation and "defense" of your proposal is part of your grade on the research proposal. 

Sometime during the semester you should make an appointment to see me to discuss this paper.  The topic of the research must in some way relate to the material or subjects covered in class.

 

 

 

Tentative Schedule and Readings

 

Week 1           9/9                   I.  Introduction and What are we Studying?

 

1) Diani, Mario.  1992.  “The Concept of Social Movement.”  The Sociological Review 40(1): 1-25.

 

                                                            2.  Theories of Relative Deprivation & Mass Behavior

 

2)      Gurr, Ted Robert.  1968. "A Causal Model of Civil Strife:  A Comparative Analysis using New Indices", American Political Science Review, Vol. 62, # 4 (December 1968), pp. 1104-1124.

 

3)      Salert, Barbara.  1976.  Revolutions and Revolutionaries: Four Theories.  Elsevier: New York. Chapter 4, pp. 50-74.

 

Recommended Readings on Deprivation/Grievances:

Davies, James C.  1974.  "The J-Curve and Power Struggle Theories of Collective Violence", American Sociological Review, 39 (No.4): 607-613.

*Davies, James C.  1962. "Towards a Theory of Revolution", American Sociological Review, Vol. XXVII. p. 5-18.

Davies, James C.  1969.  “The J-Curve of Rising and Declining Satisfactions as a Cause of Some Great Revolutions and a Contained Rebellion.”  In Hugh Davis Graham and Ted Robert Gurr (eds.), Violence in America.  New York: Bantam Books.

Recommended Readings (continued):

*Gurr, Ted Robert. 1970. Why Men Rebel.  Princeton University Press:  Princeton.  

Smelser, Neil J.  1963.  Theories of Collective Behaviour.  New York: Free Press of Glencoe.

Miller, Abraham; Boyce, Louis and Halligan, Mark. 1977. "The J-Curve Theory and the Black Urban Riots: An Empirical Test of Progressive Relative Deprivation Theory", American Political Science Review, Vol. 71(3): 964-982.

*Kornhauser, William.  1959.  The Politics of Mass Society.  New York: The Free Press.

Canache, Damarys.  1996.  “Looking Out My Back Door:  The Neighborhood Context and Perceptions of Relative Deprivation.”  Political Research Quarterly  49(3):597-.

*Huntington, Samuel.  1968.  Political Order in Changing Societies.  New Haven: Yale University Press.

Lichbach, Mark.  1989.  “An Evaluation of ‘Does Economic Inequality Breed Political Conflict?’ Studies.”   World Politics 41:4(July).  Pp. 431-70.

Midlarsky, Manus.  1982.  “Scarcity and Inequality.”  Journal of Conflict Resolution 26: 3-38.

Muller, Edward.  1985.  “Income Inequality, Regime Repressiveness, and Political Violence.  American Sociological Review 50: 47-61.

Muller, Edward and Mitchell Seligson.  1987.  “Inequality and Insurgency.”  American Political Science Review 81(2): 425-451.

 

 

Week 2           9/16                 Rational Choice Perspectives and Formal Models

 

1)      Salert, Barbara.  1976.  Revolutions and Revolutionaries: Four Theories.  Elsevier: New York. Chapter 2, pp. 23-49. (on reserve) (B)

 

2)      DeNardo, James.  1985.  Power in Numbers.  Princeton: Princeton University Press. pp. 32-86 (A)

 

3)      Granovetter, Mark.  1978.  “Threshold Models of Collective Behavior”,  American Journal of Sociology, 83(6):1420-1443.  (A)

 

4)      Ferree, Myra Marx.  1992.  "The Political Context of Rationality: Rational Choice Theory and Resource Mobilization", pp.29-52 in Frontiers in Social Movement Theory, Morris, Aldon and Mueller, Carol McClurg, eds. Yale University Press: New Haven. (B)

 

 

Recommended Readings:

           

*Tullock, Gordon.  1971. "The Paradox of Revolution", Public Choice, Vol. XI (Fall), pp. 89-99.

 

*Olson, Mancur.  1971.  The Logic of Collective Action.  Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

 

Chong, Dennis.  1991.  Collective Action and the Civil Rights Movement.  Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

 

            Taylor, Michael, ed.  1988.  Rationality and Revolution.  Cambridge University Press:  Cambridge.

 

            Popkin, Samuel.  1979.  The Rational Peasant: The Political Economy of Rural Society in Vietnam.  Berkeley: University of California Press.

 

Opp, Karl-Dieter and Gern, Christiane.  1993.  “Dissident Groups, Personal Networks, and the East German Revolution of 1989.”  American Sociological Review 58(5):659-680.

 

Opp, Karl-Dieter.  1989.  The Rationality of Political Protest.  A Comparative Analysis of Rational Choice Theory.  Boulder: Westview.

 

 

 

Week 3           9/23     Resource Mobilization Theories of Social Movements

                                    I.  Theoretical Overview

 

 

1)      McCarthy, John D. and Zald, Mayer.  1977.  "Resource Mobilization and Social Movements: A Partial Theory", American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 82, No. 6 (May), pp. 1212-41.  (A and B)

 

2)      Kriesi, Hanspeter.  1996.  “The Organizational Structure of New Social Movements in a Political Context.” In McAdam, McCarthy and Zald’s  Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements.  Pp.  152-184.  (A)

 

3)      Rucht, Dieter.  1996.  “The Impact of National Contexts on Social Movement Structures: A Cross-Movement and Cross-National Comparison”  In McAdam, McCarthy and Zald’s  Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements.  Pp.  185-204. 

 

 

                                    II.  Empirical Research

 

4)      Cress, Daniel and David Snow.  1998.  “Mobilization at the Margins: Organizing by the Homeless.”  In Social Movements and American Political Institutions.  Anne Costain and Andrew McFarland, eds.  Pp. 73-98. (A)

5)      Gamson, William.  1990.  The Strategy of Social Protest.  2nd. ed.  Belmont, CA:  Wadsworth.  pp. 14-88 (B)     

 

Recommended Readings:

McCarthy, John and Zald, Mayer.  1973.  The Trend of Social Movements in America: Professionalization and Resource Mobilization.  Morristown: General Learning Press. 

*Snow, David; Zurcher, Louis; and Ekland-Olson, Sheldon.  1980.  "Social Networks and Social Movements: A Microstructural Approach to Differential Recruitment", American Sociological Review, 45, pp. 787-801.

Jenkins, J. Craig.  1983. "Resource Mobilization Theory and the Study of Social Movements", Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 9, pp. 527-553. 

*Oberschall, Anthony.  1973.  Social Conflicts and Social Movements.  Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. 

Schumaker, Paul.  1975.  "Policy Responsiveness to Protest-Group Demands".  Journal of Politics.  :488-521.

 

*Zald, Mayer and Roberta Ash.  1966.  “Social Movement Organizations: Growth, Decay and Change”, Social Forces  44(March): 327-40.

Zald, Mayer N. and McCarthy, John. eds.  1979.  The Dynamics of Social Movements.  Cambridge MA: Winthrop Publishers.

Zald, Mayer N. and McCarthy, John. eds.  1987.  Social Movements in an Organizational Society.  New Brunswick: Transaction Books.

Week 4           9/30                 Political Opportunity Structure

1)      McAdam, Doug.  1996,  “Conceptual Origins, Current Problems, Future Directions.”  In McAdam, McCarthy and Zald’s  Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements.  Pp. 23-40.  (A and B)

2)      Brockett, Charles D. 1991. “The Structure of Political Opportunities and Peasant Mobilization in Central America.” Comparative Politics 23: 253-274  (A and B)

3)      Kitchelt, Herbert.  1986.  "Political Opportunity Structure and Political Protest: Anti-Nuclear Movements in Four Democracies.  British Journal of Political Science, 16, pp. 57-85. (B)

4)      McCarthy, John D; Britt, David and Wolfson, Mark.  1991.  “The Institutional Channeling of Social Movements by the State in the United States.”  Research in Social Movements, Conflicts and Change 13.  JAI Press.  Pp.45-76. (A)

5)      Jenkins, J. Craig and Perrow, Charles.  1977.  "Insurgency of the Powerless: Farm Worker Movements (1946-1972)", American Sociological Review, Vol. 42 (April), pp. 249-268.   (A and B)

 

Recommended Readings:

Amenta, Edwin and Zylan, Yvonne.  1991.  “Political Opportunity, the New Institutionalism and the Townsend Movement.”  American Sociological Review 56(2): 250-265.

 

Schock, Kurt.  1999.  “People power and political opportunities: social movement mobilization and outcomes in the Philippines and Burma.”  Social Problems  46(3): 355-75.

Jenkins and Klandermans, eds.  1995.  The Politics of Social Protest: Comparative Perspectives on States and Social Movements.  Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

 

Sawyers, Traci M. and David S. Meyer.  1999.  “Missed opportunities: social movement abeyance and public policy.”  Social Problems 46(2):187-206.

*McAdam, Doug.  1982.  Political Process and the Development of Black Insurgency, 1930-1970.  Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Meyer, David S. and Tarrow, Sidney.  1998.  The Social Movement Society.  Boulder: Rowman and Littlefield.

*Tarrow, Sidney.  1989a.  Democracy and Disorder: Protest and Politics in Italy 1965-1975.  Oxford: Clarendon Press.

 

 

 

Week 5           10/7                 Frames and Culture

 

1)      Snow, David; E. Burke Rochford, Jr.; Steven K. Worden; and Robert Benford.  1986.  "Frame Alignment Processes, Micromobilization, and Movement Participation."  American Sociological Review 51: 464-481. (A and B)

 

2)      Benford, Robert and David A. Snow.  2000.  “Faming Processes and Social Movements:  An Overview and Assessment.”  Annual Review of Sociology 26: 611-39.   (A and B)

 

3)      Snow, David and Benford, Robert.  1992.  "Master Frames and Cycles of Protest", pp.133-155 in Frontiers of Social Movement Theory, Morris and Mueller, eds. Yale University Press: New Haven. (A and B)

 

4)      Gamson, William and Meyer, David S.  “Framing Political Opportunity.”  In McAdam, McCarthy and Zald’s  Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements.  Pp. 275-290.   (A )

 

5)      Jenson, Jane.  1987.  "Changing Discourse, changing Agendas:  Political Rights and Reproductive Policies in France" in Katzenstein Mary Fainsod and Mueller, Carol McClurg eds. The Women's Movements of the United States and Western Europe.  Philadelphia: Temple University Press. (B)

 

Recommended Readings:

 

Banaszak, Lee Ann.  1996.  Why Movements Succeed and Fail:  Opportunity, Culture and the Struggle fo Woman Suffrage.  Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Swidler, Ann.  1986.  "Culture in Action: Symbols and Strategies."  American Sociological Review 51: 273-286.

            Tarrow, Sidney.  1992.  "Mentalities, Political Cultures, and Collective Action Frames: Constructing Meanings through Action", pp. 174-202 in Frontiers of Social Movement Theory, Morris and Mueller, eds. Yale University Press: New Haven.

                                               

McAdam, Doug and Rucht, Dieter.  1993.  “The Cross National Diffusion of Movement Ideas”  in Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 528(July): 56-74.

 

McAdam, Doug.  “The Framing Function of Movement Tactics: Strategic Dramaturgy in the American Civil Rights Movement.” In McAdam, McCarthy and Zald’s  Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements.  Pp. 338-355.

 

Gerhards, Jürgen and Rucht, Dieter.  1992.  "Mesomobilization:  Organizing and Framing in Two Protest Campaigns in West Germany", American Journal of Sociology 98: 555-95.

Klandermans, Bert.  1984.  "Mobilization and Participation: Social Psychological Expansions of Resource Mobilization Theory", American Sociological Review, 49 (October): 583-600.

Moaddel, Mansoor.  1992.  "Ideology as Episodic Discourse: The Case of the Iranian Revolution", American Sociological Review, 57 (June): 353-379.

Snow, David and Robert Benford.  1988.  "Ideology, Frame Resonance, and Participant Mobilization."  International Social Movement Research 1: 197-217.

*Snow, David, et al.  1980.  "Social Networks and Social Movements:  A Microstructural Approach to Differential Recruitment"  American Sociological Review 45: 787-801.

 

 

Week 6           10/16  (Wednesday after Fall Break) Social Movements Transnationally

 

1)      Keck, Margaret and Kathryn Sikkink.  1998.  Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics.  Ithaca: Cornell University Press.  Pp. 1-217.  (A and B)

Recommended Readings:

 

Marks, Gary and Doug McAdam.  1996.  “Social Movements and the Changing Structure of Political Opportunity