{"id":960,"date":"2015-06-26T12:45:43","date_gmt":"2015-06-26T17:45:43","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/users.ssc.wisc.edu\/~oliver\/wp\/?page_id=960"},"modified":"2022-09-29T21:05:42","modified_gmt":"2022-09-30T02:05:42","slug":"political-opportunities-and-contexts","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/users.ssc.wisc.edu\/~peoliver\/teaching\/sm_seminar\/topics\/political-opportunities-and-contexts\/","title":{"rendered":"Political Opportunities and Contexts"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Overviews<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
  1. della Porta and Diani Social Movements (2nd or 3rd edition). Chapter 8. Topics: political institutions, Social movement opponents, parties, unions, policing, media and discursive opportunities. <\/li>
  2. Doug McAdam and Sidney Tarrow. 2019. “The Political Context of Social Movements”. Chapter 1 of Snow et al Wiley Blackwell Companion to Social Movements (available online through UW<\/a>) Enduring opportunities and changes in opportunities; critiques and extensions. <\/li>
  3. <\/li>
  4. * “Protest and Political Opportunities.”<\/a> David S. Meyer 2004. Annual Review of Sociology. 30: 125-45. Theoretical discussion overlaps somewhat with the above article, but also reviews a broader range of literature.<\/li>
  5. * Kriesi, Hanspeter (2004). Political Context and Opportunity. The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements. D. A. Snow, S. A. Soule and H. Kriesi. Malden, MA and Oxford, UK, Blackwell Publishing: 65-90. Attempts to analyze the different levels of the concept and in particular the way political factors affect mobilization. Builds on Kriesi 1995 (#6 below)<\/li>
  6. # Jenkins, J. C. and K. Schock (1992). \u201cGlobal Structures and Political Processes in the Study of Domestic Political Conflict.\u201d Annual Review of Sociology 18: 161-185. Engages literature on political conflict and argues for integrating two theories: (1) political process theory, emphasizing the impact of internal political institutions & processes, eg, political exclusion, indigenous organization, & political opportunity structures; and (2) theories of global structures that focus on the external or international processes of incorporation into the capitalist world economy, the social effects of foreign capital penetration, & political dependence on core states. Stable URL<\/a><\/li>
  7. Tarrow, chapters 4 (statebuiliding), 5 (political opportunities)<\/li>
  8. Jenkins, J. C. and B. Klandermans (1995). The Politics of Social Protest. The Politics of Social Protest: Comparative Perspectives On States and Social Movements. J. C. Jenkins and B. Klandermans. Minneapolis, MN, U of Minnesota Press: <\/strong>3-13. Introduction and overview. PDF of chapter<\/a> and a list of Abstracts of all chapters in the book.<\/a><\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    Conceptual\/Theoretical Articles<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
    1. “Conceptualizing Political Opportunity”<\/a> David S. Meyer and Debra C. Minkoff. Social Forces 2004 82(4): 1457-1492. Theoretical discussion plus empirical data. We will talk about how to read the tables.<\/li>
    2. # Amenta, E. and M. P. Young (1999). “Democratic States and Social Movements: Theoretical Arguments and Hypotheses.” Social Problems 46(2): 153-168. Theorizes the impact of democratic states on the mobilization of state-oriented challengers, as well as the forms of their mobilization & collective action. US state, comparatively speaking, has discouraged & continues to discourage social mobilization. Found useful by previous students.RTF format<\/a> for download to your word processor. PDF format<\/a><\/li>
    3. (*) Kriesi, H. (1995). The Political Opportunity Structure of New Social Movements: Its Impact on Their Mobilization. The Politics of Social Protest: Comparative Perspectives On States and Social Movements. J. C. Jenkins and B. Klandermans. Minneapolis, MN, U of Minnesota Press: <\/strong>167-198. discussion of different characteristics of states which help or hinder movements; western Europe. This is an empirical comparison of four countries.PDF<\/a><\/li>
    4. #Jenkins, J. C. (1995). Social Movements, Political Representation, and the State: An Agenda and Comparative Framework. In: The Politics of Social Protest: Comparative Perspectives On States and Social Movements<\/em>. J. C. Jenkins and B. Klandermans. Minneapolis, MN, U of Minnesota Press: 14-35. Good theoretical overview. . NOTE: Many of the articles in this collection are excellent, especially on the relations between movements and parties.<\/em><\/li>
    5. Tarrow, S. (1996). States and Opportunities: The Political Structuring of Social Movements. CP: 41-61. Develops a typology of state-building as a source of social movements, giving examples from the US, France, etc. Critiques the idea of the political opportunity structure as one thing.<\/li>
    6. David S. Meyer 2004. \u201cProtest and Political Opportunities.\u201dLinks to an external site.<\/a> Annual Review of Sociology. 30: 125-45. (URL http:\/\/ssc.wisc.edu\/~oliver\/SOC924\/Articles\/MeyerPolOppannurev.soc.30.012703.pdfLinks to an external site.<\/a>)<\/li>
    7. Meyer, D. S. and S. Staggenborg (1996). \u201cMovements, Countermovements, and the Structure of Political Opportunity.\u201d American Journal of Sociology 101<\/strong>(6): 1628-1660. (URL http:\/\/ssc.wisc.edu\/~oliver\/SOC924\/Articles\/MeyerStaggenborgAJS1996.pdfLinks to an external site.<\/a>)<\/li>
    8. Della Porta & Filieule Chapter from the Blackwell Companion <\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

      Authoritarian Regimes<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
      1. Xi Chen and Dana Moss “Authoritarian Regimes and Social Movements.” Chapter 38 of of Snow et al Wiley Blackwell Companion to Social Movements (available online through UW<\/a>) 2019. Understanding authoritarianism and its iterations; variation in regime repression and propensities for violence; variation in institutional access and regime responsiveness; authoritarian power sharing, elite divisions, and protest; authoritarian regimes and transnational dynamics.<\/li>
      2. Moss, D. M. (2014). “REPRESSION, RESPONSE, AND CONTAINED ESCALATION UNDER “LIBERALIZED” AUTHORITARIANISM IN JORDAN.” Mobilization 19(3): 261-286. Studies of repression’s effects on mobilization overwhelmingly focus on how severe repression affects the volume of protest, overlooking how activists perceive and experience a range of repressive tactics and how their tactical adaptations to this repertoire produce broader patterns of contention. This study therefore identifies repression’s variegated forms and movements’ corresponding responses using fifty-seven interviews with reform-oriented activists in Jordan, a “liberalized” authoritarian state, obtained in 2011. The findings demonstrate that activists (1) transformed softer repression into valued opportunities for communication with officials, and (2) responded to harder forms by publicizing repression through protests and their alliance networks, which persuaded the image-conscious regime to temper its tactics and prompted both sides to return to bargaining. This dynamic exemplifies a process of contained escalation, which helps to explain why Jordan’s Arab Spring remained nonrevolutionary. I conclude by discussing the implications for studies of repression and response in illiberal contexts.<\/li>
      3. <\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

        Cases<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
        1. # “Political Opportunities and African-American Protest, 1948-1997.”<\/a> Jenkins, J Craig. American Journal of Sociology, 2003, 109, 2, Sept, 277-303 PDF<\/a><\/li>
        2. Jami, W. A. and C. Peoples “Political opportunity, democracy, and 40 years of protest, 1981\u20132020: A cross-national analysis.” Social Science Quarterly 2022 (online first version)  https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/10.1111\/ssqu.13202<\/a>   ABSTRACT Objectives : Political opportunity is considered an important factor in any kind of activism, as it represents the context or norms in which a movement operates. Much of the extant literature has focused on political opportunity on a case-by-case basis with little consistency in its operationalization. Our goal in this study is to build toward a generalizable measure of political opportunity. To do so, we measured opportunities as democracy and used data from 90+ countries over a 40-year period, testing the long-theorized inverse-U relationship between opportunity and protest. Methods : We used all seven waves of the World Value Survey, which represents much of the world’s countries, to examine the link between political opportunity and political behaviors (signing a petition, joining boycotts, and attending peaceful protests). Results : Results confirmed the inverse-U effect on all three protest behaviors; that is, middle-of-the-road democracies had the highest levels of protest participation, whereas the most representative and most repressive societies had the lowest levels of protest participation. Conclusion : Democracy can be used to represent important dimensions of political opportunity, as it was consistent with the long-theorized inverse-U. Moreover, our approach to using democracy, a cross-national index, may serve as a stepping stone toward a unified and generalizable measure of political opportunity.<\/li>
        3. Hanspeter Kriesi, Ruud Koopmans, Jan Wilhem Duyvendak, Marco G. Giugni, “New Social Movements and Political Opportunities in Western Europe.” MS 52-65. European Journal of Political Research 22: 219-244. 1992. Discusses the impact of the political opportunity structure on the mobilization pattern of new social movements in Western Europe. Focus is on the general level of mobilization in a given country, the general forms & strategies of action employed, the system level at which mobilization is typically oriented, & the development of the level of mobilization across time. Content analysis of newspaper articles on protest events in France, Germany, the Netherlands, & Switzerland reveals country-specific variations in the mobilization patterns of new social movements. Findings confirm the relevance of the political process approach for the study of social movements. 5 Tables, 4 Figures, A good empirical article from the same study but with more specific data than the above.<\/span><\/li>
        4. * Raka Ray. “Women’s Movements and Political Fields” <\/span>Social Problems<\/i> 1998. Comparison of women’s movement in two Indian cities. <\/span>PDF Copy<\/a> Reconceptualizes the political environment in which a social movement organization operates by offering the concept of political fields, arguing that the actions, rhetoric, & effectiveness of organizations are best understood in the context of the fields in which they are situated. Drawing on 1990-1994 fieldwork data to examine the issue of violence against women in two different fields in Calcutta & Bombay, India, it is suggested that the structure of the field & an organization’s position in it shape the discourse & practice of social movement organizations; mediate the effects of organization type (politically affiliated or autonomous), & determine whether or not organizations in the same movement (& field) converge or differentiate.<\/span><\/li>
        5. J. Craig Jenkins and Charles Perrow. “Insurgency of the Powerless: Farm Worker Movements (1946-1972). MS 37-51. ASR 42: 249-268 (PDF)<\/a>. 1977. Stable URL<\/a> One of the early works on importance of elite support, which fed into political opportunity arguments.<\/li>
        6. km-11. Mary Ruggie. \u201cWorkers\u2019 Movements and Women\u2019s Interests: The Impact of Labor-State Relations in Britain and Sweden.\u201d Feminists are marginalized in British labour politics, central in Swedish. Causes and consequences. PDF<\/a><\/li>
        7. Amenta, Edwin, Bruce G. Carruthers, Yvonne Zylan. \u201cA Hero for the Aged? The Townsend Movement, the Political Mediation Model, and U.S. Old-Age Policy, 1934-1950.\u201d American Journal of Sociology 98: 308-399. 1992. PDF file<\/a><\/li>
        8. Amenta, E., K. Dunleavy, et al. (1994). \u201cStolen Thunder? Huey Long\u2019s \u201cShare Our Wealth,\u201d Political Mediation, and the Second New Deal.\u201d American Sociological Review 59<\/strong>(5): 678-702. PDF file<\/a><\/li>
        9. ^Rucht, D. (1996). The Impact of National Contexts on Social Movement Structures: A Cross-Movement and Cross-National Comparison. CP: 183-204. How national contexts affect movement structures. Compares the women\u2019s and environmental movements in France, West Germany, and the US. He argues that there are distinct national differences in political contexts, but that it is also clear that the structures change across time within countries, and argues that these changing structures are what should be meant by opportunities.<\/li>
        10. ^Dalton, R. J. (1995). Strategies of Partisan Influence: West European Environmental Groups. The Politics of Social Protest: Comparative Perspectives On States and Social Movements. J. C. Jenkins and B. Klandermans. Minneapolis, MN, U of Minnesota Press: <\/strong>296-323. 69 groups in 10 countries, compare relations to parties.<\/li>
        11. Maguire, D. (1995). Opposition Movements and Opposition Parties: Equal Partners or Dependent Relations in the Struggle for Power and Reform? The Politics of Social Protest: Comparative Perspectives On States and Social Movements. J. C. Jenkins and B. Klandermans. Minneapolis, MN, U of Minnesota Press: <\/strong>199-228. discusses why movements & parties need each other and what the dangers are.<\/li>
        12. Nollert, M. (1995). Neocorporatism and Political Protest in the Western Democracies: A Cross-National Analysis. The Politics of Social Protest: Comparative Perspectives On States and Social Movements. J. C. Jenkins and B. Klandermans. Minneapolis, MN, U of Minnesota Press: <\/strong>138-164. Comparisons. Argues that neocorporatist states not only meet needs, but repress protest.<\/li>
        13. ^km-int Katzenstein. \u201cComparing the Feminist Movements of the United States and Western Europe: An Overview.\u201d broad-ranging. consciousness, political alliances, nature of state. comparative overview. Useful.<\/li>
        14. Jo Freeman. \u201cWhom You Know versus Whom You Represent\u201d km-10. History of US women\u2019s movement and its relation to parties across time. Title refers to post-1960 differences between Reps and Dems. Very useful if you want to understand the US (including movements other than women\u2019s).<\/li>
        15. ^km-12. Joyce Gelb. \u201cSocial Movement \u2018Success\u2019: A Comparative Analysis of Feminism in the United States and the United Kingdom.\u201d UK movt is more radical and more isolated; US movt more liberal. [cf Germany] PDF<\/a><\/li>
        16. Ruggie, Mary. 1987. \u201cWorkers\u2019 Movements and Women\u2019s Interests: The Impact of Labor-State Relations in Britain and Sweden.\u201d  In Mary Fainsod Katzenstein and Carol McClurg Mueller (eds.) The Women\u2019s Movements of the United States and Western Europe. Temple University Press<\/em> https:\/\/ssc.wisc.edu\/~oliver\/SOC924\/Articles\/Ruggie.pdfLinks to an external site.<\/a><\/li>
        17. Kriesi, Hanspeter, Ruud Koopmans, Jan Wilhem Duyvendak, Marco G. Giugni, 1992 \u201cNew Social Movements and Political Opportunities in Western Europe.\u201d European Journal of Political Research<\/em> 22: 219-244. https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/abs\/10.1111\/j.1475-6765.1992.tb00312.x (Links to an external site.)<\/a><\/li>
        18. Clemens, Elisabeth S. 1993. Organizational Repertoires and Institutional Change: Women\u2019s Groups and the Transformation of U.S. Politics, 1890-1920. American Journal of Sociology<\/em> 98 (4): 755-798. https:\/\/ssc.wisc.edu\/~oliver\/SOC924\/Articles\/Clemens.pdfLinks to an external site.<\/a><\/li>
        19. Schock, Kurt. 1999. \u201cPeople Power and Political “Opportunities: Social Movement Mobilization and Outcomes in the Philippines and Burma.\u201d Social Problems 46(3): 355-375 https:\/\/www.jstor.org\/stable\/pdf\/3097105.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3A8f52f8b4e8a9086da2d0788803aa7a80 (Links to an external site.)<\/a><\/li>
        20. Moghadam, Valentine M. and Elham Gheytanchi. 2010. \u201cPolitical opportunities and strategic choices: Comparing feminist campaigns in Morocco and Iran\u201d Mobilization<\/em> 15(3):267-288. https:\/\/mobilizationjournal.org\/doi\/pdf\/10.17813\/maiq.15.3.n248564371645v14<\/a><\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

          Political Parties<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
          1. Sven Hutter, Hanspeter Kriesi, Jasmine Lorenzini. 2019. Social Movements in Interation with Political Parties. of Snow et al Wiley Blackwell Companion to Social Movements (available online through UW<\/a>) Interactions between movements and parties, creation of new parties, broadening contexts.<\/li>
          2. Stephanie Mudge & Anthony Chen’s (2014) “Political Parties and the Sociological Imagination: Past, Present, and Future Directions” (Links to an external site.)<\/a> in ASR<\/em><\/li>
          3. Jack Goldstone’s (2004) “More Social Movements or Fewer? Beyond Political Opportunity Structures to Relational Fields (Links to an external site.)<\/a>.” (summary pgs. 335-337)<\/li>
          4. Jo Freeman’s (1986) “The Political Culture of the Democratic and Republican Parties (Links to an external site.)<\/a>” in PSQ<\/em><\/li>
          5. De Leon, Desai, & Tugal’s (2009) “Political Articulation: Parties and the Constitutions of Cleavages in the U.S., India, and Turkey (Links to an external site.)<\/a>” in Sociological Theory<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

            Polarization<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
            1. Delia Baldassarri & Peter Bearman’s (2007) \u201cDynamics of Political Polarization. (Links to an external site.)<\/a>“<\/li>
            2. Miguel Centeno & Joseph Cohen’s (2012) “The Arc of Neoliberalism (Links to an external site.)<\/a>” in ASR<\/li>
            3. Josh Pacewicz’s (2015) “Playing the Neoliberal Game: Why Community Leaders Left Party Politics to Partisan Activists” (Links to an external site.)<\/a> in AJS<\/em><\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

              Political Identities & Movements<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
              1. Gary Downey (1986) “Ideology and the Clamshell Identity: Organizational Dilemmas in the Anti-Nuclear Power Movement” (Links to an external site.)<\/a><\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

                Global South & Other Cases Outside US\/Europe<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
                1. (*) Boudreau, V. (1996). \u201cNorthern Theory, Southern Protest: Opportunity Structure Analysis in Cross-National Perspective.\u201d Mobilization 1(2): 175-190. Political process model extended to Southern hemisphere. Extends the political process model of protest, particularly its opportunity structure component, to developing countries. At issue is how to render the model’s central variables & relationships with enough flexibility to accommodate new cases outside the industrial North. Three questions are asked: how movement networks’ internal social connections vary across settings, how variations in state strength & elaboration influence protest; & how the relationship between movement social structure & the external political environment shape opportunities. Also considered is how political opportunity can illuminate new cases if used in connection with specific collective forms that are both encouraged by external structures & responsive to needs & constraints produced by internal structure. PDF<\/a><\/li>
                2. Schock, K. (1999). \u201cPeople Power and Political Opportunities: Social Movement Mobilization and Outcomes in the Philippines and Burma.\u201d Social Problems 46(3): 355-375. Assesses the relevance of the political opportunity framework for social movements in nondemocratic contexts by applying it to two people power movements that occurred in the Philippines & Burma during the 1980s. The movement in the Philippines culminated in the toppling of the Ferdinand Marcos dictatorship & a democratic transition. The movement in Burma was violently suppressed, &, although multiparty elections were subsequently held as a result of the protest movement, the military regime refused to honor them & remained in power. As expected by the political opportunity framework, influential allies & elite divisions influenced the mobilization & outcomes of the movements. Word Processor Copy of Article<\/a><\/li>
                3. Rodrigues, C., & Prado, M. (2013). A History of the Black Women\u2019s Movement in Brazil: Mobilization, Political Trajectory and Articulations with the State. Social Movement Studies, 12(2), 158\u2013177. sih. This study examines the trajectory and consolidation process of the Black Women\u2019s Movement (BWM) in the Brazilian public sphere since the 1980s. Our objective is to understand the processes that underlie the constitution of this social movement, as well as its points of convergence and divergence with the black and feminist movements. Furthermore, this study discusses the movement\u2019s process of institutionalization\/bureaucratization, its articulation with the Brazilian state and the relationship between gender and race in its internal structure and external claims. The study is based on two research projects conducted between 2005 and 2011. The first, carried out between 2005 and 2007, deals specifically with the consolidation of the BWM, while the second, a four-year study completed in 2011, focuses on the relationship between the black movement and the adoption of race-based public policies in Brazil and Colombia. Data for this research were collected from the BWM\u2019s internal documents (a compilation of pamphlets, newsletters and proposals), government documents and informal conversations and semi-structured interviews with 12 black women activists from different regions of the country. Throughout the work, we consider the BWM\u2019s internal processes of creating an autonomous movement as well as its external processes of bureaucratization and interconnection with the state. Focusing on these parallel processes allows us to better understand the movement\u2019s internal conflicts, its articulations with other social movements, its challenges and methods of navigating political\/institutional spaces and the ways in which the emergence of black women as political actors has impacted Brazil\u2019s public sphere. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]<\/li>
                4. Yan, F. (2013). A Little Spark Kindles a Great Fire? The Paradox of China\u2019s Rising Wave of Protest. Social Movement Studies, 12(3), 342\u2013348. sih. Mass protests in China in recent years have been more frequent and widespread than in other authoritarian settings and have thus become a serious source of concern for the party-state. Many believe that a rising tide of protest has the potential to impose a significant political challenge to the stability of the regime in comparison to the fragile situation of 1989 the Tiananmen incident. However, the motives behind today\u2019s protests are clearly not revolutionary. The growing protest movements do not serve as a severe threat to the continued rule of the Chinese Communist Party for three reasons. First, the nature of recent protests has not been that of pro-democracy; rather, the participants are aggrieved citizens who have suffered economic losses and who demand concrete and practical rights for unfair and unjust treatments. They are politically weak despite their huge numbers. Second, the characteristics of recent protests do not constitute any of the features that would involve serious political risk. Instead, protests are focused on local issues and target specifically at local authorities. Third, the shifting international environments and China\u2019s rise to international power change the political visions of educated Chinese and further undermine their potential to initiate protests that would have more serious political implications. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

                  Move to Contexts<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
                  1. <\/li><\/ol>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

                    Overviews della Porta and Diani Social Movements (2nd or 3rd edition). Chapter 8. Topics: political institutions, Social movement opponents, parties, unions, policing, media and discursive opportunities. Doug McAdam and Sidney Tarrow. 2019. “The Political Context …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":217,"menu_order":39,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/users.ssc.wisc.edu\/~peoliver\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/960"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/users.ssc.wisc.edu\/~peoliver\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/users.ssc.wisc.edu\/~peoliver\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/users.ssc.wisc.edu\/~peoliver\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/users.ssc.wisc.edu\/~peoliver\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=960"}],"version-history":[{"count":20,"href":"https:\/\/users.ssc.wisc.edu\/~peoliver\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/960\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2280,"href":"https:\/\/users.ssc.wisc.edu\/~peoliver\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/960\/revisions\/2280"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/users.ssc.wisc.edu\/~peoliver\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/217"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/users.ssc.wisc.edu\/~peoliver\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=960"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}