The problem with social movements: a reply to Fournier

Abstract

This is a reply to:

Fournier, Philippe. 2014. “The multitude and localized protest: the example of the Quebec student strike.” Global Discourse. 4 (2–3): 163–178. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23269995.2014.923641

Notes

1. When I discuss social movement theory here I follow the article’s lead and discuss the primarily US-based social movement theory tradition of which the two main strands are resource mobilisation theory and political opportunity theory.

2. There is a danger here that I am eliding the distinction between a claim and a demand; however, I think claims and demands function similarly enough here to make this a legitimate move. It is, after all, a small enough leap from a political problematic based on claim making to Della Porta and Diani’s (1999, 233) statement that, ‘all movements make demands on the political system’.

3. The problem of demands is also tied with the frame of the nation state. The power of nation states may well be caught within the flow of power on a global level but at the global level whom exactly do you put your demands to?

4. This approach is suggested by The Free Association (2010), a collective writing project of which I’m a member.

5. We could even say that, apart from their performative aspects, demands are redundancies when thought in relation to problems. As Deleuze (2006, 380) says: ‘You always get the solutions you deserve depending on the problems that have been posed’.

6. For an extended discussion of the problematic addressed by the General Assemblies of post-crisis movements see Milburn (2014).