词条 | Radical flank effect | ||||||||
释义 |
The radical flank effect refers to the positive or negative effects that radical activists for a cause have on more moderate activists for the same cause.[1] According to Riley Dunlap, the idea of a radical flank effect "has a lot of credibility among social-movement scholars".[2] HistoryIn 1975, Jo Freeman introduced[3]{{rp|28}} the term "radical flank" with reference to more revolutionary women's groups, "against which other feminist organizations and individuals could appear respectable."[4]{{rp|236}} The term "radical flank effect" was coined by Herbert H. Haines.[5] In 1984, Haines found that moderate black organizations saw increased rather than decreased funding as the radical black movement emerged.[6] In his 1988 Black Radicals and the Civil Rights Mainstream, 1954-1970, Haines challenged the prevailing view that confrontational and militant black activists created a "white backlash" against the more moderate civil-rights movement.[7]{{rp|2}} Rather, Haines argued, "the turmoil which the militants created was indispensable to black progress" and helped mainstream civil-rights groups.[7]{{rp|2}} Haines measured positive outcomes based on increases in external income to moderate organizations and legislative victories. While nearly half of the income data was estimated or missing[8] due to the refusal of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and the Congress of Racial Equality to divulge their complete financial records, it was more extensive than the data used by Doug McAdam in his classic work on resource mobilization. Haines' data was thorough for the moderate organizations (such as the NAACP) which comprised the dependent variable for his research.[9] Positive and negative effectsPositive
Negative
Predictors of positive flank effectsIt's difficult to tell without hindsight whether the radical flank of a movement will have positive or negative effects.[2] However, following are some factors that have been proposed as making positive effects more likely:
Game-theoretic formulationDevashree Gupta developed a game-theoretic model of radical flank effects. In addition to distinguishing positive vs. negative flank effects on moderates, she suggested also considering effects on radicals:[18]{{rp|10}}
Her extensive-form game involved a choice by moderates of whether to clearly distinguish themselves from radicals, and then a choice by the external actors being lobbied as to whether to grant concessions:[18]{{rp|18–19,23}}
Violent radical flankIn the radical-flank literature, "radical" may mean either more extreme in views and demands or more extreme in activist methods, possibly including the use of violence.[19] Studies of civil resistance have typically found that nonviolent activism is ideal, since violence by a movement makes state repression seem legitimate. That is, violence yields a negative radical flank effect.[19] Indeed, states sometimes seek to label nonviolent movements as terrorist and violent, or incite them to violence through provocation and agents provocateurs, in order to justify suppression.[19] Barrington Moore, Jr., in books such as Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy and A Critique of Pure Tolerance, observed the prominent use of violence which preceded the development of democratic institutions in England, France and the United States. A survey of Moore's critics notes that they were generally "impressed by Moore's case for progressive violence, but eager to move on to other topics, instead of considering the implications of these issues."[20]In a study of 53 "challenging groups", social movement analyst William Gamson found that groups that were willing to use "force and violence" against their opponents tended to be more successful than groups that were not.[21] In a study of 233 campaigns, neither Kurt Schock nor Erica Chenoweth found support for a positive violent radical flank effect and also found that violence decreased mass mobilization.[19] Chenoweth and Schock's data set was limited to "ideal types of campaigns...that rely solely on nonviolent or violent tactics." She does not study "mixed campaigns" of both violence and nonviolence, although it is documented that most real-life campaigns are varied in this way.[22] William Gamson's data set included some groups that threatened and prepared for violence without fully engaging in it. Francis Fox Piven writes that the use of in violence in social movements is often under-reported by activists cultivating a nonviolent image, as well as by social movement scholars who are sympathetic to them.[23]Some recent studies have compared the violent flank with the diversity of tactics effect, and found both to have positive effects in movement campaigns.[24] [25] The African National Congress believe that both nonviolence and armed conflict were important in ending Apartheid.[41] John Bradford Braithwaite concludes from this that when violent factions already exist, moderates shouldn't necessarily shun them, but moderates shouldn't seek to create violent factions.[26] See also
References1. ^{{cite book|last1=Haines|first1=Herbert H.|title=The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social and Political Movements|date=14 Jan 2013|publisher=Blackwell Publishing|chapter=Radical Flank Effects|doi=10.1002/9780470674871.wbespm174|isbn=9781405197731}} 2. ^1 2 3 4 {{cite news|last1=Mooney|first1=Chris|title=How Science Can Predict Where You Stand on Keystone XL|url=https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/04/keystone-xl-protesters-science-joe-nocera-bill-mckibben?page=3|accessdate=25 February 2015|agency=Mother Jones|date=17 Apr 2013}} 3. ^{{cite web|last1=Dillard|first1=Courtney Lanston|title=The rhetorical dimensions of radical flank effects: investigations into the influence of emerging radical voices on the rhetoric of long-standing moderate organizations in two social movements|url=http://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/handle/2152/543|accessdate=25 February 2015|date=2002}} 4. ^{{cite book|last1=Freeman|first1=Jo|title=The Politics of Women's Liberation: A Case Study of an Emerging Social Movement and Its Relation to the Policy Process|date=1975|publisher=Addison-Wesley Longman Limited}} 5. ^{{cite web|title=Herbert H. Haines|url=http://www2.cortland.edu/schools/arts-and-sciences/herbert-h.-haines.dot|publisher=State University of New York College at Cortland|accessdate=24 February 2015|date=March 2007}} 6. ^{{cite journal|last1=Haines|first1=Herbert H.|title=Black Radicalization and the Funding of Civil Rights: 1957-1970|journal=Social Problems|date=Oct 1984|volume=32|issue=1|pages=31–43|url=http://irasilver.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Reading-Movement-funding-Haines.pdf|doi=10.2307/800260|jstor=800260}} 7. ^1 2 3 4 5 {{cite book|last1=Haines|first1=Herbert H.|title=Black Radicals and the Civil Rights Mainstream, 1954-1970|date=1988|publisher=Univ. of Tennessee Press}} 8. ^{{cite journal|author1=Mary Nell Morgan|title=An Imperfect Assessment of Movement Flank Actions|journal=Southern Changes|date=1990|volume=12|issue=1|pages=12–13|url=http://beck.library.emory.edu/southernchanges/article.php?id=sc12-1_004|accessdate=25 February 2015}} 9. ^Herbert H. Haines, "Black Radicalization and the Funding of Civil Rights: 1957-1970" Social Problems, Oct., 1984 (University of California Press), pp. 31-43 10. ^1 {{cite book|last1=Lyon|first1=Thomas|title=Good Cop/Bad Cop: Environmental NGOs and Their Strategies toward Business|date=5 Feb 2010|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-1933115771|edition=1}} 11. ^[https://books.google.com/books?id=aKt8f_PpRSQC&printsec=frontcover&dq=challenging+authority&hl=en&sa=X&ei=PJQMVcb6C8qwsASKsoII&ved=0CCgQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=nonviolence&f=false Francis Fox Piven, Challenging Authority: How Ordinary People Change America (Rowman & Littlefield, 2006), pg 23-25] 12. ^Emilye J. Crosby “‘This Nonviolent Stuff Aint No Good. It’ll Get You Killed.’: Teaching About Self-Defense in the African-American Freedom Struggle” in Teaching the American Civil Rights Movement, Julie Buckner Armstrong et al, eds. (Routledge, 2002) 13. ^“We Will Shoot Back – Reviews” NYU Press website 14. ^{{cite web|last1=Gupta|first1=Devashree|title=The Strategic Logic of the Radical Flank Effect: Theorizing Power in Divided Social Movements|url=http://government.arts.cornell.edu/assets/psac/sp14/Gupta_PSAC_Feb7.pdf|accessdate=25 February 2015}} 15. ^{{cite book|editor1-link=Jeff Goodwin|editor2-link=James M. Jasper|title=The Social Movements Reader: Cases and Concepts|date=20 Apr 2009|publisher=Wiley-Blackwell|isbn=978-1405187640|edition=2}} 16. ^{{cite web|last1=Dobson|first1=Charles|title=Social Movements: A Summary of What Works|url=http://www.citizenshandbook.org/movements.pdf|website=The Citizen's Handbook|accessdate=25 February 2015|date=August 2001}} 17. ^1 {{cite journal|author1=Belinda Robnett|author2=Rebecca Trammell|title=Negative and Positive Radical Flank Effects on Social Movements: The Influence of Protest Cycles on Moderate and Conservative Organizations|journal=Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association, Hilton San Francisco & Renaissance Parc 55 Hotel, San Francisco, CA|date=14 Aug 2004|url=http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/0/9/4/6/p109468_index.html|accessdate=25 February 2015}} 18. ^1 {{cite journal|last1=Gupta|first1=Devashree|title=Radical flank effects: The effect of radical-moderate splits in regional nationalist movements|journal=Conference of Europeanists|date=Mar 2002|url=http://ibrarian.net/navon/paper/Radical_Flank_Effects__The_Effect_of_Radical__Mod.pdf?paperid=23267|accessdate=25 February 2015}} 19. ^1 2 3 {{cite web|author1=Kurt Schock|author2=Erica Chenoweth|title=Radical Flank Effect (Webinar)|url=http://nonviolent-conflict.org/index.php/learning-and-resources/educational-initiatives/usip-course/icncusip-2010/1428-radical-flank-effect-webinar|website=International Center on Nonviolent Conflict|accessdate=25 February 2015}} 20. ^[https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00212740 Jonathan M. Wiener, "The Barrington Moore thesis and its critics" Theory and Society, 1975, Volume 2, Issue 1, pp 301-330] 21. ^William Gamson, The Strategy of Social Protest (Wadsworth, 1990) 22. ^[https://books.google.com/books?id=7on0obGSuVIC&pg=PA200&lpg=PA200&dq=gamson,+chenoweth,+social&source=bl&ots=Zl9Zg6tFmI&sig=4o9X_yRW_Jzr-FSaiqSirlvHbrI&hl=en&sa=X&ei=hXYLVaWRHbaQsQSRmoKACg&ved=0CDoQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=mixed%20campaign&f=false Erica Chenoweth and Maria Stephan "Mobilization and Resistance: A Framework for Analysis" in Rethinking Violence: States and Non-state Actors in Conflict, edited by Erica Chenoweth, Adria Lawrence, p. 251 (note 9)] 23. ^[https://books.google.com/books?id=aKt8f_PpRSQC&printsec=frontcover&dq=challenging+authority&hl=en&sa=X&ei=PJQMVcb6C8qwsASKsoII&ved=0CCgQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=nonviolence&f=false Francis Fox Piven, Challenging Authority: How Ordinary People Change America (Rowman & Littlefield, 2006), pg 23-25] 24. ^{{Cite journal|last=Taylor|first=Blair|date=2013-12-01|title=From alterglobalization to Occupy Wall Street: Neoanarchism and the new spirit of the left|journal=City|volume=17|issue=6|pages=729–747|doi=10.1080/13604813.2013.849127|issn=1360-4813}} 25. ^{{Cite journal|last=Rowe|first=James K.|last2=Carroll|first2=Myles|date=2014-04-03|title=Reform or Radicalism: Left Social Movements from the Battle of Seattle to Occupy Wall Street|journal=New Political Science|volume=36|issue=2|pages=149–171|doi=10.1080/07393148.2014.894683|issn=0739-3148}} 26. ^1 {{cite journal|last1=Braithwaite|first1=John Bradford|title=Rethinking Radical Flank Theory: South Africa|journal=RegNet Research Paper No. 2014/23|date=2013|ssrn=2377443}} 2 : Social change|Political theories |
||||||||
随便看 |
|
开放百科全书收录14589846条英语、德语、日语等多语种百科知识,基本涵盖了大多数领域的百科知识,是一部内容自由、开放的电子版国际百科全书。