Social Movements | Sociology Optional for UPSC (Notes) PDF Download

Introduction - Social Movements

Social movements have played a significant role in shaping the state, its functions, responsibilities, and accountability. They have influenced the distribution of power among different segments of society and have challenged established authorities like the Church and feudal systems. Examples include the French and Russian revolutions, Indian freedom movement, and various peasant movements.

• Impact of Social Movements on Political Systems and Values: Movements like the fascist movement in Germany, Islamic movement in the Middle East, Hindutva movement in India, and Tamilian movement in Sri Lanka have not only affected political systems but also the value systems of the people. Their legacies continue to influence societies in various ways.
• The Role of Social Movements in Contemporary Politics: In modern times, social movements occur in all states and often play a decisive role in both democratic and authoritarian political systems. They can make or break political institutions, norms of social and political behavior, and even the nature of regimes. Social and political conflicts, as well as people's expectations, are reflected in these movements.
• Significance of Understanding Social Movements: Understanding social movements is crucial for activists, academics, critics, and supporters of the political system. It helps them comprehend the fragility of political institutions and their future. A thorough understanding of social movements can provide valuable insights into the nature of political institutions, the Constitution, political decisions, and legislation.
• Social Movements and the Indian Constitution: The Directive Principles and Fundamental Rights of the Indian Constitution can be better understood by analyzing the political processes that influenced the Indian freedom movement in the 1930s and 1940s. Similarly, land reform legislations of the 1950s have their roots in various peasant movements across the country.

Benefits of Studying Social Movements

Studying social movements offers a way to blend humanistic and social scientific concerns. It combines the humanist's concern with historical understanding and values, and the social scientist's concern with using general principles to systematically order empirical data. Factual knowledge of these events is essential for interpreting, ordering, and comparing them in the context of political systems and institutions.

Definition of Social Movements 

Social movements are often discussed in various contexts, including media, politics, and historical trends. However, the term "social movement" gained significance in the early nineteenth century during a period of social upheaval when people demanded democratic rights, freedom, and equality. Since then, social movements have become an essential aspect of collective action for political and social change. This article will discuss the key concepts and elements of social movements, including collective action, social change, and common purpose.

1. Collective Action: Collective action is the mobilization of people for political action, which is a crucial aspect of social movements. However, not all collective behaviors can be considered social movements. For example, a mob's impulsive actions, riots between ethnic groups, or destruction of public property are not social movements by themselves. These actions may become part of a social movement only when they are engineered as a program for a larger agenda of social change.
2. Social Change: Social change is an essential dimension of social movements. It encompasses the collective action for bringing change, maintaining, or not disturbing the status quo. Depending on the objectives, social movements can be classified into movements that aim to challenge the existing social order or counter-movements that aim to maintain the status quo. It is important to note that there is no one meaning of social change, as different scholars and activists have different ideological positions on the political system and expected social outcomes.
3. Common Purpose: Social movements are characterized by common purposes and social solidarities. These movements are collective challenges to elites, opponents, and authorities, based on shared goals and values. Participants in social movements often share a sense of dissatisfaction with the current form of life and hope for a new scheme or system of living.

Importance of Social Movements 

Social movements play a significant role in shaping society and politics. They challenge the status quo, articulate grievances and problems, and bring pressure on the state. In this context, it is essential to understand the different approaches to studying social movements, such as the Marxist, Structural-Functional, and Gandhian approaches.

• Marxist Approach: The Marxist approach focuses on the inherent conflict in society, especially class conflict. According to this approach, social movements are driven by the struggle between the haves and the have-nots, with the ultimate goal of overthrowing the dominant classes in power.
  • Class struggle and social movements: Class struggle is the central driving force for resistance in the Marxist approach. Social movements emerge from the collective actions of the exploited classes seeking to bring about revolutionary political change.
  • Consciousness and social movements: Marxist scholars argue that members of the same class share a common consciousness regarding their position in society, which facilitates their collective action against the ruling classes and state.
  • Critiques and debates within the Marxist approach: There are debates among Marxist scholars on various theoretical and methodological issues. The Subaltern Studies group, for example, critiques traditional Marxist historians for ignoring the history of the masses and the role of cultural factors in shaping class consciousness.
• Structural-Functional Approach: The Structural-Functional approach focuses on the role of social institutions and structures in shaping social movements. According to this approach, social movements arise from the tension between the needs of individuals and the limitations imposed by social structures.
  • Institutional constraints and social movements: Structural-Functional scholars argue that social movements are a response to the limitations imposed by social institutions, which often fail to meet the needs and aspirations of individuals.
  • The role of culture and values in social movements : This approach also emphasizes the role of culture and values in shaping social movements, arguing that cultural factors can either facilitate or impede the emergence and spread of social movements.
• Gandhian Approach: The Gandhian approach to social movements emphasizes nonviolent resistance and the importance of ethical principles in guiding social change.
  • Nonviolence and social movements: Gandhian scholars argue that social movements should be based on nonviolence and should seek to transform society through peaceful means.
  • Ethics and social movements: The Gandhian approach also emphasizes the importance of ethical principles in guiding social change, arguing that social movements should be grounded in values such as truth, justice, and compassion.

Structure- Functional Approach 

The structure-functional approach to analyzing social movements varies among non-Marxist scholars, with differing ideological positions on the need for social and political change and the role of movements in this process. This essay will discuss the various perspectives from liberal scholars, Indian scholars, and those who emphasize political development, as well as the functional utility of public protests in a parliamentary form of government.

• Liberal Scholars' View on Social Movements: Liberal scholars such as William Kornhauser, Robert Nisbet, and Edward Shils argue that mass movements arise from mass societies characterized by extremism and anti-democratic tendencies. These scholars advocate for limiting the masses' participation in politics to ensure efficient government functioning. They emphasize the importance of political change within existing institutions rather than revolutionary changes in political and economic structures.
• Indian Scholars' Perspective: Some Indian scholars, while supporting the agitation for independence from foreign rule, disapproved of people's agitation in the post-independence period. They considered such protests 'dangerous' and 'dysfunctional' for civilized society. Other Indian scholars, however, advocate for political change, focusing on the importance of political institutions and culture.
• Political Development Theory: Scholars who adhere to the theory of political development argue that existing rigid or incompetent political institutions inadequately meet people's rising aspirations. As the gap between people's expectations and the system's performance widens, political instability, disorder, and mass upsurge increase. Rajni Kothari suggests that direct action is inevitable in India's current parliamentary democracy due to the general climate of frustration, ineffectiveness of communication channels, and the continuous conflict between rulers and the ruled.
• Functional Utility of Public Protests: Some scholars argue that public protests have a functional utility even in parliamentary governments. David Bayley observes that before and after India's independence, a large number of people felt that institutional means of redress for grievances were inadequate. Public protests, thus, serve as an alternative channel for expressing dissatisfaction and seeking change.

Gandhian Approach 

Gandhi leading the Salt Satyagraha, 1930

• Critique of Modernity and Capitalism: Mahatma Gandhi, the leader of India's freedom movement, was critical of the Western model of modernity that developed under the industrial revolution. He was against the capitalist economic system and had a deep concern for the poor and marginalized sections of society.
• Causes of Conflict in Society: According to Gandhi, conflict in society arises not due to conflicting economic and social interests among communities or classes, but due to different understandings of interests and society, different moral and ethical values regarding good and evil, and prejudices against each other.
• Purity of Means in Social Struggles and Conflict Resolution: Gandhian ideology emphasizes the importance of non-violent means in social struggles and resolving conflicts. Gandhi believed that violence could never truly end injustice, as it inflamed the prejudice and fear that fed oppression. He advocated for ahinsa or non-violence, stating that unjust means would never produce a just outcome.
• Satyagraha: Non-Violent Resistance: Gandhians advocate for resistance against injustice through satyagraha, a method combining satya (truth) and agraha (insistence or holding firmly). This approach, termed the "Gandhian dialectic" by Bondurant (1988), is a dialectical process where non-violent action engages existing power structures in a truth-seeking struggle, leading to a more just and truthful relationship.
• Distinction between Satyagraha and Passive Resistance: Gandhi distinguished between satyagraha and passive resistance, stating that passive resistance is practiced by the weak and does not necessarily involve complete adherence to truth. In contrast, satyagraha is a weapon of the strong and insists upon truth and non-violence under any circumstance.
• Dialogical Resistance: Gandhi's method of resistance, termed "dialogical resistance" by David Hardiman, aimed to change the hearts and reasoning of the enemy through persuasion and dialogue. While he acknowledged the need for additional political pressure in some cases, he maintained that the adversary was not an enemy and that it was a breach of satyagraha to wish ill or harm them.
• Self-Limiting Approach to Conflict: Wehr (1979) described Gandhi's approach to conflict as self-limiting. He carefully focused each satyagraha campaign on a single, clear issue to prevent proliferation of issues and maintain good personal relations with opponents during a campaign. His policy of complete openness in communication reduced the threat and suspicion that secrecy and unpredictability could introduce into a conflict.

Conclusion

Social movements play a crucial role in shaping society, politics, and challenging the status quo. Understanding the various approaches to social movements, such as the Marxist, Structural-Functional, and Gandhian approaches, provides valuable insights into the causes, methods, and objectives of these movements. By analyzing these perspectives, scholars, activists, and policymakers can better comprehend the impact of social movements on political systems, values, and institutions, and work towards creating a more just and harmonious society.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) of Social Movements

What are the key elements of social movements?

The key elements of social movements include collective action, social change, and common purpose. Collective action refers to the mobilization of people for political action, while social change encompasses the collective action for bringing change, maintaining, or not disturbing the status quo. Common purpose characterizes social movements as collective challenges to elites, opponents, and authorities, based on shared goals and values.

What are the different approaches to studying social movements?

The different approaches to studying social movements include the Marxist approach, which focuses on class conflict and revolutionary change; the Structural-Functional approach, which emphasizes the role of social institutions and structures in shaping social movements; and the Gandhian approach, which advocates for nonviolent resistance and the importance of ethical principles in guiding social change.

How do social movements impact political systems and values?

Social movements can influence political systems and values by challenging the status quo, articulating grievances and problems, and bringing pressure on the state. They can impact the distribution of power among different segments of society, challenge established authorities, and influence the nature of political institutions, the Constitution, political decisions, and legislation.

Why is it essential to study and understand social movements?

Studying and understanding social movements is crucial for activists, academics, critics, and supporters of the political system. It helps them comprehend the fragility of political institutions and their future, and provides valuable insights into the nature of political institutions and the factors that shape political processes and decisions.

How does the Gandhian approach to social movements differ from other approaches?

The Gandhian approach to social movements emphasizes nonviolent resistance and the importance of ethical principles in guiding social change. It focuses on the need for purity of means in social struggles and conflict resolution, advocating for ahinsa (non-violence) and satyagraha, a method combining satya (truth) and agraha (insistence). This approach stands in contrast to the Marxist approach, which is centered on class struggle and revolutionary change, and the Structural-Functional approach, which focuses on the role of social institutions and structures.