Sociology · Ch 13 — Social Movements
Types of Social Movements
Types of Social Movements
Understanding the Types of Social Movements
Social movements are not all the same. They differ in what they want to change, how much change they seek, and the methods they use. Sociologists have developed a simple classification to make sense of this variety: movements can be redemptive, reformist, or revolutionary. But in real life, most movements are a mix of these types, and their character can shift over time.
The Three Classic Types
Redemptive (or Transformatory) Movements
These aim to change the personal consciousness and actions of individual members. The focus is on inner transformation — a change in beliefs, values, or daily practices — rather than on overhauling the entire social structure.
Example: The Ezhava community in Kerala, led by Narayana Guru, was guided to change its social practices. This was a redemptive movement because it sought to transform the self and community from within.
Reformist Movements
These seek to change existing social and political arrangements through gradual, incremental steps. Reformists work within the system, pushing for specific legal or policy changes rather than trying to tear down the whole structure.
Examples:
- The 1960s movement for the reorganisation of Indian states on the basis of language.
- The recent Right to Information (RTI) campaign, which pushed for greater transparency in government.
Revolutionary Movements
These attempt to radically transform social relations, often by capturing state power. Revolutionaries do not believe the existing system can be fixed from within — they want to replace it entirely.
Examples:
- The Bolshevik revolution in Russia, which deposed the Tsar and created a communist state.
- The Naxalite movement in India, which seeks to remove oppressive landlords and state officials.
Why Classification Is Not Always Neat
When you try to place a real movement into one of these three boxes, you will often find that it contains elements of all three. A movement may start with revolutionary objectives and later become reformist. It may begin with mass mobilisation and collective protest, then become more institutionalised — what social scientists call a move towards social movement organisations.
How a movement is perceived and classified also depends on who is doing the classifying. The same event can be seen very differently by different groups.
Example: The events of 1857 were called a mutiny (an act of defiance against supposedly legitimate authority) by British colonial rulers, but Indian nationalists called it the first war of independence (a challenge to the very legitimacy of British rule). This shows that people attach different meanings to social movements.
Old Social Movements vs. New Social Movements
Old Social Movements
These were typical of the industrial era in the capitalist West. Their central goal was the reorganisation of power relations. Working-class movements fought for better wages, living conditions, social security, free schooling, and health security from the state. Socialist movements aimed to establish entirely new kinds of states and societies.
Key features:
- Functioned within the frame of political parties.
- Examples: The Indian National Congress leading the Indian National Movement; the Communist Party of China leading the Chinese Revolution.
New Social Movements
These emerged in the affluent West, where welfare states had already addressed many basic material needs. Some argued that class-based exploitation and inequality were no longer the central concerns. Instead, new movements focused on quality-of-life issues — such as having a clean environment — rather than on changing the distribution of power.
Key features:
- Not organised along class lines alone.
- Often unite participants across class boundaries.
- Identity politics, cultural anxieties, and aspirations are essential elements.
- Many are international in scope, because globalisation has reshaped lives across borders — transnational firms, international regulations like those of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), and global environmental and health risks all create new issues.
The Indian Context
Political scientist Rajni Kothari attributes the surge of social movements in India in the 1970s to people's growing dissatisfaction with parliamentary democracy. He argues that state institutions have been captured by elites, so electoral representation by political parties is no longer an effective way for the poor to get their voices heard. People left out by the formal political system join social movements or non-party political formations to put pressure on the state from outside.