【Fri. Dictionary】什么是社会运动（social movement）？
译文：参考了吕炳强：《我思、我们信任，社会之奥秘》，台北：漫游者文化，第98页。
原文：John Scott,2014, A Dictionary of Sociology, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
社会运动 相当数目的人们为改变（或抗拒改变）社会某些主要的方面而组织起来的努力。这个词汇最早是由圣西门（Saint-Simon）使用，用来描述……。现在则更最通常的是用于指涉政治系统的主流之外的人群和组织。
社会学家通常关注和研究社会运动的诸起源、招新的资源、组织式的动力，以及它们对社会的影响。（the origins of such movements,their sources of recruitment, organizational dynamics, and their impact uponsociety.）
社会运动是有目标和有组织的集体行为（collective behaviour）。社会运动的例子包括支持民权等运动。集体行为的例子包括暴动、狂热的宗教、谣言等。……。
社会运动本身不是正式的组织或政治党派，而是诸个人和诸团体松散的诸网络。其中的团体可能包括一定的正式组织或政治党派。（见 Mario Diani, ‘The Concept of Social Movement’,Sociological Review, 1992）……。诸个人、诸团体和诸组织（Individuals, groups, and organizations）所组成的一场社会组织，是由他们的共同目标和关注（common goals and concerns）、共同行动的投入（involvement in common action）所统一起来。它们在社会的常规政治渠道之外运作，但是可能十分深入地渗透（penetrate）进作为利益团体的政治权力圈子（political power circles）……。
关于诸社会运动的类型学，其早期的发展是由David F. Aberle(The Peyote Religion among the Navaho, 1966)加以区分的。他将诸社会运动分为两个维度：寻求改变的位置（社会或诸个人）、寻求改变的程度（部分或总体）（the locus ofchange sought (society or individuals), and the amount of change sought (partialor total).）基于这个划分，他提出了四个范畴：转型的、改良的、救赎的、修正的（transformative, reformative,redemptive, and alternative）社会运动。……。
在北美，“资源动员”（ Resource mobilization）理论具有特别的影响力，而在西欧，“认同导向”（ identity-oriented）的理论则更为普遍。前者的典型作品是Mayer N. Zald and John D.McCarthy (The Dynamics of Social Movements, 1979)，……。（后者则可以参考）图海纳的(The Return ofthe Actor, 1988)。
————————————————
链接词汇：
第34期：【Friday Dictionary】什么是能动性（agency）？
第32期：【Friday Dictionary】什么是社会秩序（Social Order）
第26期：【Friday Dictionary】什么是结构（Structure）
social movements Anorganized effort by a significant number of people to change (or resist changein) some major aspect or aspects of society. The term was first used by *Saint-Simonin France at the turn of the 18th century, to characterize the movementsof social protest that emerged there and later elsewhere, and was applied tonew political forces opposed to the status quo. Nowadays, it is used mostcommonly with reference to groups and organizations outside the mainstream ofthe political system. These movements, often now abbreviated to NSMs(New Social Movements), in the latter decades of the 20th centurybecame an increasingly important source of political change. Sociologists haveusually been concerned to study the origins of such movements, their sources ofrecruitment, organizational dynamics, and their impact upon society.
Social movements are purposeful and organizedforms of *collective behaviour. Examples of social movementswould include those supporting civil rights, gay rights, trade unionism,environmentalism, and feminism. Examples of collective behaviour would includeriots, fads and crazes, panics, cultic religions, rumours, and mass delusions.Social movements are one of the basic elements of a living *democracy,and may be catalysts of democracy and change in authoritarian societies.
Social movements are not themselves formalorganizations or *political parties, but are loosernetworks of individuals and groups that may embrace a number of such organizations(see Mario Diani, ‘The Concept of Social Movement’, Sociological Review, 1992). Thus, a labour movement mayembrace various trades unions, cooperatives, socialist parties, and workingmen's clubs, without being reducible to any of these. Individuals, groups, andorganizations that comprise a social movement are united by their common goalsand concerns and their involvement in common action. They operate outside theregular political channels of society, but may penetrate quite deeply intopolitical power circles as *interest groups.Their goals may be as narrow as legalizing marijuana, or as broad as destroyingthe *hegemony of the capitalist world system; theymay be revolutionary or reformist; but they have in common the active organizationof a group of citizens to change the status quo in some way. Under the broad bannerof a social movement (such as for example ‘the peace movement’) many individualsocial movement organizations (SMOs) may operatein a relatively independent way, sometimes causing confusion and conflictwithin the movement itself.
An early typology of social movements, developedby David F. Aberle (The Peyote Religion among the Navaho, 1966),classifies social movements along two dimensions: the locus of change sought(society or individuals), and the amount of change sought (partial or total).The four categories derived from this classification are transformative, reformative,redemptive, and alternative. These are (respectively) movements which aim atthe complete restructuring of society (for example *millenarianmovements); those which attempt to reform some limited aspects of theexisting order (such as nuclear disarmament groups); movements which seek tolead members away from a corrupt way of life (as in the case of many religioussectarian groups); and, finally, those which aim to change only particulartraits of the individual member (for example Alcoholics Anonymous). The firsttwo of these are therefore aimed at changing (all or part of) society; thelatter pair at changing the behaviour only of individual members.
The dramatic visibility of social movements, andtheir challenge to the mainstream of society, has made them an object of greatsociological interest. Many studies have focused on their expressive andirrational qualities, emphasizing the pathological elements of socialmovements, as for example in Eric Hoffer's TheTrue Believer (1951) and Theodor Adorno et al.'s The Authoritarian Personality (1950). Thewave of nonviolent, largely middle-class social movements in the 1960s and1970s produced more positive lines of research and analysis. Great attentionwas paid to the objective and subjective conditions of social movementactivity: many theorists like Seymour Martin Lipset blamed the alienatingconditions of mass society. Marxists and neo-Marxists proposed new forms ofclass division and class conflict as underlying causes. Others explored theeffects of *relative deprivation and rising expectations on themobilization of citizens. Still other studies followed the stages of socialmovement development, from the initial recognition of a grievance to the fullydeveloped movement organization: Neil Smelser's ‘value added theory’ remains aclassic of this type (see Theory of Collective Behaviour, 1963). In his account, sixsequential determinants of development are identified, each one progressivelynarrowing the range of possible outcomes. These determinants are structuralconduciveness (the broadest social conditions necessary for the movement tooccur); structural strain (a sense of injustice or malaise); the growth and spreadof a generalized belief (such as an ideology which offers answers to people's problems);precipitating factors (events that trigger action); mobilization ofparticipants for action (for example via conversion); and, finally, theoperation of social control. In the 1970s still more detailed evidence ofsocial movement dynamics came through multivariate analysis ( T. Gurr, Why Men Rebel, 1970).
‘Resource mobilization’ theories of socialmovements are particularly influential in North America, while‘identity-oriented’ theories are more common in Western Europe. The former isexemplified in the work of Mayer N. Zald and John D. McCarthy (The Dynamics of Social Movements,1979), who discuss movements as organizations, and focus especially on theneeds of such organizations to mobilize resources. These theories investigatethe range of resources that have to be mobilized by groups, examine the ways inwhich such resources are deployed, and consider the actions by whichauthorities may attempt to limit such resources. Within this perspective, theterm ‘resources’ takes on a wide array of meanings, including economicresources, ideologies, rhetoric, and symbols. Factors like leadership,communications networks, available time, money, and business or politicalconnections are seen as crucial in explaining the growth and success or failureof social movements. Identity-oriented theories, by contrast, see socialmovements as a special type of social conflict which is at the heart of modernsociety and social change. Thus, according to the French sociologist AlanTouraine, ‘the concept of social movement [should be] at the centre ofsociology’ (The Return of the Actor,1988). This perspective sees social movements as the central groups in the newsocial politics and realignments (for example the Women's Movement, and theEcological Movement) and as sources of new political identities. Indeed,Touraine's method of intervention not only treats social movements as one ofthe most fundamental forms of citizen action, but also requires thatsociologists join the action not just to study but to encourage it. Few Britishor American sociologists have followed Touraine into this delicate territory,and most sociology of social movements involves the *objective analysisof organizations and political processes.
（Sociological理论大缸第37期）
其它链接：
第33期：赵鼎新评魏昂德《毛泽东治下的中国：一场革命脱了轨》
第30期：“事件社会学”读本（自编）
第25期：当我们说“Unintended后果”时，为什么不说“Unanticipated后果”