Abstract
In the first chapter an attempt was made to formulate a working concept of social movement distinguished in terms of: 1. conscious commitment to change, 2. minimal organization, and 3. normative commitment and participation. This working concept is closely linked with the concept of ‘culture’, defined as ‘a whole way of life, material, intellectual and spiritual’,1 and with ‘historical tendencies’, for social movements both initiate and reflect changes in the wider society. The major advantages claimed for this broad conceptualization are its flexibility and cultural interchangeability. However, the very generality of the concept raises real difficulties when one attempts to typologize social movements. On what basis can the daunting variety of phenomena embraced by the concept be differentiated and categorized?
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes and References
This definition follows one of the alternatives identified by Raymond Williams, Culture and Society 1780-1950, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth 1961, p. 16.
Various recent historical studies exemplify these different aspects: on labour sectarianism, E. Hobsbawm, Primitive Rebels, Manchester University Press, Manchester 1959, pp. 126–45;
A. M. McBriar, Fabian Socialism and English Politics, Cambridge University Press, London 1962;
Margaret Cole, The Story of Fabian Socialism, Heinemann, London 1961.
See, for example, Alfred Cobban, The Social Interpretation of the French Revolution, Cambridge University Press, London 1964.
David Truman, “Political Group Analysis”, inInternational Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, Vol. 12, 1968, pp. 241–5.
Arthur F. Bentley, The Process of Government, University of Chicago Press, 1908, p. 211.
Cf., Mancur Olson, The Logic of Collective Action, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass. 1965, for cogent theoretical criticisms on these lines.
Robert A. Dahl, Pluralist Democracy in the United States, Rand McNally, Chicago 1967, can be placed as a distinguished recent contribution to this tradition.
J. G. Lapalombara, Interest Groups in Italian Politics, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey 1964.
S. E. Finer, Anonymous Empire, Pall Mall Press, London 1958.
J. D. Stewart, British Pressure Groups, Oxford University Press, London 1958.
G. Almond and J. Coleman, The Politics of Developing Areas, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey 1960, chapter 1.
Francis G. Castles, Pressure Groups and Political Culture: A comparative study, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London 1967, p. 1.
For example, S. M. Upset, The First New Nation: The United States in Historical and Comparative Perspective, Heinemann, London 1964,
Barrington Moore, Social Origins of Democracy and Dictatorship, Allen Lane The Penguin Press, London 1967.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1971 Macmillan Publishers Limited
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wilkinson, P. (1971). Typology and Politicization. In: Social Movement. Key Concepts in Political Science. Palgrave, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-01093-6_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-01093-6_3
Publisher Name: Palgrave, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-333-12105-4
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-01093-6
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)