Category Archives: Chapter 8: When Everyone Protests

Chapter 8- Professional Organizers, more necessary today?

Posted on by

Chapter 8, “When Everyone Protests,” is way to start thinking about both sides of a protest and movement-countermovement dynamics.  I thought Lucie did an excellent job of giving an overview of Myer’s points, so I won’t re-state those.  Among other specifics in the chapter, such as getting the attention of people with political power, I was most interested in Meyer’s take on the importance of professional organizers in movements. Especially as we being to think about countermovements and the necessity of responding to the “other side,” professional organizers might be vital to the success and impact of a protest.  As Lucie mentioned in her post, activists must put energy into their own movement, but also engage with the countermovements and publicize rebuttals.

Meyer first introduces professional organizers in Chapter 3, Becoming an Activist. There, he gives a good background about who becomes an activist, and the different types of activists that exist. Specifically, Meyer notes that  “movement professionals” are people who support themselves through organizing and political efforts.  These people do not just view the movement as a hobby, but as a lifestyle; there is always something to do that could be advancing the cause within the movement. Meyer says that movement professionals “develop a stronger vested interest in the survival and well-being of their organizations than will the rank and file activist” (55).

As we think more about countermovements, it’s good to acknowledge all the work that goes into managing the movement’s own message as well as incorporating responses to media coverage of the countermovement. Considering the bigger picture, Meyer points out that movements have become more complicated in general: “Whereas protest was the province of those without other means to make political claims effectively, it is now an add-on or component of the political strategy of an increasingly broad range of groups” (159).  Today, instead of all attention going into the protest, there are not a lot more considerations, such as current policy, lobbying, outreach campaigns to other organizations, e-mail and telephone communication, applying for police permits and posting bail.

Here are some questions I’ve had. What do you think?:

  • OWS not only has no professional organizers, but no identified leaders.  Is the absence of “professional organizers” a detriment or an advantage to the movement? Do every day citizens act as “movement professionals” in any way?
  • Has OWS engaged with a countermovement of any kind? How so?
  • What would Meyer say about OWS’s lack of engagement in the political process? Do you think the movement ever try to brand itself with politics or an existing power structure?

-Caitlin Manak

Why Everyone Protests (Why Nothing Gets Done)

Posted on by

Firstly I would like to provide a summary of the key points of this chapter for review. Meyer begins this chapter acknowledging the power of incorporating politics into social movements. Protesting at social movements, for example the Democratic national convention in Chicago in 1968, is a great way to gain the attention of the federal and state governments but also to gain political allies. Originally Meyer states that political protest was greater in the past than now, and contrastingly fewer issues were protested about in the past than are now. This increase of issues protested about alludes to JP’s question as to whether civil disobedience has become overused. Meyer admits in this chapter that the increase of social movements has created a “cluster of issues” (146) and each issue receives less attention as a result.

From there, Meyer then moves on to discuss the double-sidedness of political protests. Meyer uses the examples of abortion and civil rights to present the case that each political movement has a countermovement. He briefly states that although these movements may be the direct opposite of one another, they still often use the same tactics as mentioned in Chapter 5. Political protests have so many components to them due to the fact that each one has a countermovement. Meyers writes “Activists on more than one side of an issue must deal not only with each other, but also the outsiders drawn into the conflict” (150). Activists not only have to worry about organizing and promoting their side of the issue, but also have to stay on top of the counter movement’s plans and rebut their statements.

Not only is there countermovement to every movement, but also there is bipartisanship within both the state and federal government. So therefore you have the two sides of one issue fighting against each other, Republicans and Democrats fighting against each other, and the state and federal governments fighting against each other as well. It’s no wonder political protests never make any real progress. Political protests often have more resources than non-political protests because they engage politicians with power into the equation. These politicians can act as representatives for each side of the issue and make sure their opinions are debated in government meetings. However, because the state and federal governments often have different rulings and do not come to similar conclusions on rulings, there is a lot of gray area within these hot button issues. For example with abortion, Roe v. Wade ruled that a women can terminate her pregnancy during the first trimester, the state holds power in the third trimester, but during the second trimester, there needs to be a “balancing of rights” (152). This balancing of rights leaves a lot of room for interpretation. Take gay marriage, the federal government does not recognize gay marriage, yet they give states the right to make their own individual decisions. Well not all states have the same policies, so there again is a gray area of indecision.

In conclusion, Meyer states that the reason why political protests take so long to resolve, or might never be resolved is because of the split in government and the continued existence of movements and countermovement. Also, because political protest has become more commonly accepted in the present, people risk less by joining a movement. Therefore, there are more issues being debated and lots and lots of clutter.

Okay now for the fun part…some questions for you to think about:

1.)    Going back to JP’s question has the increase of political issues being debated taken away from their overall meaning? Would it be more conducive to focus on only a few hot button topics (gay marriage, abortion) at a time?

2.)    In what ways does a bipartisan government create standstills for social movements? Are these standstills necessary to keep the peace? Could these standstills ever realistically be removed somehow?

3.)    Is there a countermovement to Occupy Wall Street? If so, does that mean OWS is a political protest? If not, does that mean OWS does not qualify to be a political protest?

– Lucie Dufour