Social Movements and Social Change - Resource Mobilization (SOCI 1306)

Social Movements and Social Change SOCI 1306 Resource Mobilization By highlighting the importance of resources—more especially, time and money—in determining the success of social movements, McCarthy and Zald's (1977) resource mobilisation theory offers a crucial framework for comprehending the dynamics of social movements. This theory holds that social movements' ability to obtain and strategically employ these resources determines how effective they are. The theory presents the idea of social movement organisations (SMOs), which are independent organisations inside larger social movements that strive towards common objectives. Together, these SMOs make up the social movement industry (SMI), which is a term used to describe the whole of social movements inside a particular community. The social movement industry's overall power and reach are facilitated by the combined impact of these SMOs. McCarthy and Zald change the focus of social movement analysis from purely ideological or cultural elements to the pragmatics of planning, funding, and maintaining collective action by emphasising resource mobilisation. A powerful example of the resource mobilisation hypothesis in action is the American civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. This movement was a part of a series of social movements that had come before it, such as the Women's Suffrage Movement and other labour movements; it was not an isolated or abrupt phenomena. These previous movements made up what McCarthy and Zald refer to as a "social movement sector," which is a more expansive set of several social movement enterprises with various objectives and target audiences. Although the civil rights movement had its origins in earlier campaigns for racial equality, it really took off in the middle of the 1950s, when a number of pivotal moments and calculated mobilisations determined the movement's course and consequences. Rosa Parks's act of resistance in 1955 was a turning point in the history of the civil rights struggle. Despite appearing to be an isolated incident, Parks's refusal to give up her bus seat to a white man was supported by her leadership training and extensive association with the NAACP. Despite not being planned, this act of civil disobedience became a potent symbol of opposition to racial segregation. Following Parks' imprisonment, there was a great deal of public outcry and a surge in community action, which culminated in the Montgomery Bus Boycott. The civil rights movement was shaped by this boycott, which served as a prime example of resource mobilisation in action. The prompt and efficient mobilisation of resources was essential to the Montgomery Bus Boycott's success. Alternative forms of mobility were crucial when the public transit system was boycotted. In response, the community set up carpools, which necessitated extensive volunteer recruitment and coordination. Local churches were instrumental in providing both practical and symbolic support for the boycott. Numerous churches took the lead in organising and maintaining the boycott movement, with their pastors serving as key organisers. In addition, the infrastructure and outreach of the movement were strengthened by the emergence of new groups like the Club From Nowhere, The Friendly Club, and In Friendship. During this time, Martin Luther King Jr. became known as a strategic and charismatic leader. His direction and upholding of the movement's momentum were greatly aided by his leadership. In order to gain support and further the movement's goals, King had to be able to clearly state its intentions and form connections with powerful people, especially elites in the federal government. His leadership fostered a cohesive and productive social movement industry, as did the work of other SMOs like the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), and the National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People (NAACP). Together, these SMOs—each with unique tactics and objectives—addressed various aspects of racial injustice. The cooperation of various groups, each of which provided resources and knowledge, demonstrated the effectiveness of group mobilisation in advancing the civil rights movement. The resource mobilisation hypothesis emphasises that these movements' ability to successfully organise, finance, and maintain their operations through efficient resource management is just as important to their success as their ideological appeal. The fight for racial equality has continued despite the civil rights movement's notable accomplishments, which include historic legal improvements like the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Even though the campaign was successful in getting laws changed, deeply rooted societal injustices and attitudes persisted. New obstacles have emerged in the way of the movement's continued attempts to preserve and build upon its accomplishments. Recent events, including the U.S. Supreme Court's weakening of the Voting Rights Act, emphasise the ongoing need for activity and vigilance to address enduring imbalances and guarantee Black Americans and other marginalised populations fair access to voting rights. In summary, by highlighting the crucial role that resources play in determining a movement's success, McCarthy and Zald's resource mobilisation theory offers a useful lens through which to analyse the dynamics of social movements. The 1950s and 1960s civil rights movement is a potent illustration of how social movement organisations may effectively achieve substantial social change via coordinated efforts, smart leadership, and efficient resource mobilisation. But as seen by the ongoing efforts to redress the legacy of racial injustice, social movements' work is never totally accomplished and necessitates constant effort and adaptability to changing circumstances.