Culture, Power, and Institutions: A Multi-Institutional Politics Approach to Social Movements

Abstract

We argue that critiques of political process theory are beginning to coalesce into a new approach to social movements-a "multi-institutional politics" approach. While the political process model assumes that domination is organized by and around one source of power, the alternative perspective views domination as organized around multiple sources of power, each of which is simultaneously material and symbolic. We examine the conceptions of social movements, politics, actors, goals, and strategies supported by each model, demonstrating that the view of society and power underlying the political process model is too narrow to encompass the diversity of contemporary change efforts. Through empirical examples, we demonstrate that the alternative approach provides powerful analytical tools for the analysis of a wide variety of contemporary change efforts. anonymous reviewers for helpful comments. A special thanks to Kristine Olsen for research assistance.

Hybrid Activism: Social Movement Mobilization in a Multimovement Environment

“…Individuals (Armstrong and Bernstein 2008). They face competition from other social movement organizations that seek to mobilize the same constituents, claim the same foundation grants, and seize the attention of the same media outlets.…”

Strategies Employed by Inner-City Activists to Reduce Alcohol-Related Problems and Advance Social Justice

“…Viewing society as a multi-institutional system, where power resides in the state as well as other institutions, provides a more inclusive framework for understanding how groups influence institutions and how institutions influence one another (Armstrong & Bernstein, 2008). For example, activists may also draw on the power of some institutions to press for change in other institutions (Armstrong & Bernstein, 2008), such as using news media to leverage change in corporate practices.…”

“…Although some social movement theorists stress the government as the target for change (McAdam, Tarrow, & Tilly, 2001), others point out that social movement activists often direct challenges toward a broader array of targets such as non-government institutions (e.g., mass media, corporations, religion, education) or in the cultural rather than civic realm (e.g., shaping public opinion, or challenging stigmatized identities) (Armstrong & Bernstein, 2008;Van Dyke, Soule, & Taylor, 2004;Walker, Martin, & McCarthy, 2008).…”

“…For example, activists may also draw on the power of some institutions to press for change in other institutions (Armstrong & Bernstein, 2008), such as using news media to leverage change in corporate practices. Activists may also focus on strategies that facilitate member empowerment or build mobilization, even when there are not direct or immediate political benefits (Armstrong & Bernstein, 2008;Baillie et al, 2004).…”

“…For example, activists may also draw on the power of some institutions to press for change in other institutions (Armstrong & Bernstein, 2008), such as using news media to leverage change in corporate practices. Activists may also focus on strategies that facilitate member empowerment or build mobilization, even when there are not direct or immediate political benefits (Armstrong & Bernstein, 2008;Baillie et al, 2004). This broader perspective emphasizes the importance of studying social movement strategies, rather than focusing solely on political opportunities in the environment, "in part because there is not presumed to be any obvious or inevitable relationship between environment and strategy" (Armstrong & Bernstein,p.…”