The discontentment of people against certain policies of government no doubt may lead to all forms of grievances, which may be expressed or unexpressed. Where it is expressed, it takes the forms of protest such as strikes and demonstrations; which are either organized or unorganized. Social movement on the other hand refers to an organized group of people with the major goal of bringing about a purposive change in the society. The major targets are the societal and/ or governmental policies, which are considered repugnant and detrimental to the generality of the people or a cross section of the society. For example, the various feminist groups across the globe are organized groups of articulate women seeking a major shift in governmental policies …show more content…
Through this, it generates debates on the issue and popularizes it to effect the designed change. The change, which is the ultimate of social movements, could be achieve either partially or in full depending on the commitment, the strategies and methods employed by the group as well as the resistance posed by the opposing forces. This explains why every social movement must be armed with an ideology. The leadership must be well organized to carry the people along to orientate them towards a change of the social system. The leadership helps weigh the pros and cons of each of the methods before embarking on it but whatever technique adopted must be with the ultimate aim of achieving its goal. There are many social movements across the globe depending on the people’s desire for change or resistance against certain policies. Some do seek gradual changes in the operations while some desire radical changes depending on the wishes and aspirations of their members. It is on this basis that scholars have classified social movements according to their motives and modes of
Cesar Chavez Rhetorical Analysis Throughout the existence of mankind, many cultures and civilizations have encountered a form of injustice treatment that has resulted in political movements. Some were supported by violence, such as the Revolutionary War, which was an ultimate result of Great Britain’s lack of freedom of religion, while others, such as the women’s suffrage movement, were based solely on nonviolence. In one of his magazine articles, Cesar Chavez explores Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s idea that nonviolent resistance is the most powerful when fighting injustice as well as why and how this is possible.
The 1900s was a time period filled with political corruption, social inequality and injustice, discrimination, poor working and living conditions. The progressive movement resulted in response to these issues. Members and advocates of this movement were usually white (some blacks too), middle-class, Christian, college educated women (and men). They sought to achieve social justice through equality and enhance life in America for everyone. To further the nation’s democratic ideals, they hoped to incorporate reforms based on the expectations of the majority public.
Peaceful resistance begins with one person or group battling an injustice, like Rosa Parks who inspired others to protest segregation during the Civil Right’s Movement. Protesters must next raise awareness about the issue and invite others to protest with them so that the issue can be “brought out in the open where it can be seen and dealt with”(Martin Luther King Jr., “Letter From A Birmingham Jail”). As the movement grows, the government is forced to comply with the demands to change the law, the result of King’s effort against segregation. Once that law is changed, the government is altered to accommodate that change, leading to greater changes in the nation’s morals and ideals. These changes are then able to influence how others perceive those issues and may subsequently influence other nations to change their governments.
If each person recognized “that companion fact: when a majority of the people are hungry and cold they will take by force what they need. And the little screaming fact that sounds through all history: repression works only to strengthen and knit the repressed” (Grapes 306), then governments would no longer be so controlling in people’s lives. Steinbeck portrays that the government’s attempts to keep the people repressed only unite everyone with a common interest: being freed from repression. People also overlook their capability to resolve issues; many believe they are not influential enough, but in reality, working together is the most effective form of opposition to the government. Today, several conflicts in society could easily be fixed if every individual
“Alone we can do so little; together we can do so much” (Helen Keller). An unassisted individual cannot transform an aspect of society. A job as complex as changing the world, essentially is nearly impossible for one person to complete. In history anyone who craved a modification in the world, brought their ideas to the public for support. These dissenters of the past were accomplished in gathering groups of people, to all achieve the same goal.
Some change have potential to become monumental ones, those taking combined efforts of people. When presented with a major conflict, the combined efforts of those people towards this revolution aimed to reach a goal, in which it did. Though with a crowd of people, there is no fail-safe way of creating a method of success that appeases each and every one of them, simply due to the fact we as humans all have different wants, needs, and ways of thinking. Much like the French Revolution, not all goals have been met, but more prevalent ones have been, which gives way slowly solving the other ones. Problems identified by the revolution include the mistreatment of superior powers, abuse of tax, and failing governments to name a few.
For the United States, the mid-nineteenth century is a time when social activism in American society is reflected in the writing. These writers were determined to change the way of life, if not for themselves, for someone else. Their writings would become incite to some of the deepest issues of the time. First, social activism in America is seen in the efforts of women to gain legal and social equality as citizens and as human beings in their private lives. Elizabeth Cady Stanton wanted to change the rights of the female population.
Introduction Imagine you or one of your family members was someone who fights for what they believe is right. Activism is very important and is when someone speaks up for what they believe in. This chapter will explain what activism is and how it could help many people around the world. Activism What is activism?
Improvement of the group features was an important causal factor that strongly mobilized the women’s suffrage movement given that it solved the movements pre-existing problems. A group feature that
There have been many movements over time that has led America to where we are today. “The Antebellum reforms was a new, more radical anti-slavery movement that emerged by the early 1830s. Its program for ending slavery stood in stark contrast to the “colonizationist” position earlier advocated by some prominent Americans and embodied in the American Colonization Society (1816–1964)”. (Walters, 1995) This reforms were put into place to better everyone as well as their families.
Occupy Wall Street has prided itself as being a leaderless movement, one initiated and led by the masses. This rhetoric sounds poetic and ideal, but no social organization or movement can succeed without a structural hierarchy. Occupy Wall Street’s own website states that “Occupy Wall Street is a leaderless resistance movement”, and when a movement “[doesn’t] have a centralized leadership structure and clear lines of authority, they have real difficulty reaching consensus and setting goals.” That rings true with Occupy Wall Street. Occupy Wall Street has not had caused any systemic, meaningful change, due to its lack of structure.
Because of this, others followed her lead, began straying from social bus standards, and eventually boycotted buses altogether. These people challenged the social standards, thus leading to a social change. The refusal to follow the guidelines of the society promotes social progress by causing people to have new ideas. This civil disobedience is also often present in literature. Two major examples of this
Social movement is not the task of a few persons, called to a specific purpose, but it is the responsibility of the whole community. They must learn the commitment to shared goals, consensus decision making, open and honest communication, shared leadership, climate of cooperation, and collaboration. Partnership and collaboration with others need sacrifices from both sides to be able to share vision, open up for communication, confrontation, etc. …, and most importantly, to sacrifice oneself in order to reach the vision or the plan that they have set out to achieve. For instance, the Indian Independence March, the Selma March, and the Sharpeville Massacre showed “self-sacrifice” of the protest through many deaths to gain independence (Howard).
When playing the role of an activist on in any form, activism is constantly prominent in their lives. Activism is defined to be the policy or action of using dynamic and often confrontational campaigning by means of organizing demonstrations and protests to achieve the goal in bringing about political and/or social change. Then there is slacktivism which refers to the actions that are performed via the Internet to support and stand up to a political or social cause but which can be regarded as requiring little time, effort and involvement, e.g. signing an online petition or joining a campaign group on a social media website. When considering activism, certain pros and cons come to mind.
In James Scott’s writings about “Everyday Forms of Resistance”, he makes many points about power and where it may lie, even if the points are unintentional they provide a solid argument with great examples to back up those arguments. Scott argues that a vast realm of political action is overlooked for two reasons. The first reason is that it is not openly declared in the usually understood sense of “politics”. Second, the group action displayed is not how we normally understand collective action. From these two reasons, Scott suggested that arguments could be developed, stating that “much of the politics of subordinate groups fall into the category of “everyday forms of resistance”, these activities should most definitely be considered political.””