Transnational movements: to what extent do they express a discourse of resistance that is truly global?

Transnational movements: to what extent do they express a discourse of resistance that is truly global? 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Student Name: Konstantin Efremov 

ID Number: 6506493 

Module Convenor: Rafaella Pugionni 

Number of Words: 2800 

Submission Time/Date: 4:00 PM, 28th November 2011 
 
 
 
 
 
 

      In a rapidly globalizing world the international arena has become a frontier for social dispute. Globalization has altered the international system to integrate into the so-called transnational zone, a new spatial location where the state as an international actor is constrained by expansion of the transnational zone itself and emergence of new actors within the international arena. Globalization processes created a new economic geography of centrality, one that cuts across national boundaries… It has emerged as a transnational space for the formation of new claims by global capital but also by other types of actors.¹ The emergence of new actors in the international arena has limited the state’s ability to act independently from within its boundaries, more so the state has become part of a transnational dimension where it’s influence is no longer dominant.  In addition to creating new global actors including transnational corporations, international non-governmental organizations, international banks, and criminal networks, globalization has led social movements to evolve in transnational social movements representing social dissent on international level.  Globalization implies substantial changes in both the scope and character of social relations and we should expect it therefore to affect the ways that people engage in collective political action.² This means that globalization is in fact the key reason social movements become transnational, the more globalization affects the world, the more social movements become influential in the understanding of new forms of politics where the state is forced to share dimensions of influence. Social movements problematize older models of sociological explanation insofar as they see politics organized solely around the nation-state.³ In many cases these social movements are exclusively concerned with resisting the authority, it is very often these movements are against nation-state. In contemporary global resistance transnational movements are considered key players in accumulating social change. In the response to rapidly integrating world social movements develop, mature and become global. While social movements evolve internationally, their agendas become broadened significantly by the discourse on the international arena. 

      Throughout the last fifty years social movements have taken hundreds of focuses on social life and social change, varying from environmental protection to human rights abuses, however each field of interest to these movements is still characterized by opposition to modern structural establishment. Since the early 1990s the world is witnessing what is most probably the broadest movement network mobilization in world history. Such rapid movement network mobilization can be best described by the so-called concept of global economic shift. The current global economic system optimizes the values and criteria of performance, efficiency and productivity; nowadays performance defines the new locus of belonging of the global subjects, who ought to live on accomplishing short-term responsibilities at any cost. Being efficient and cultivating performance has become the new global avatar for the myth of progress and development; global performance provides a new sense of universality to national communities. It goes without saying that such an over-evaluation of economic performance in general human activities that one can find in discourses of many economic global players has direct implications for democratic life. According to this viewpoint, political negotiations must also follow the pattern of efficiency and thus fall within the timetable of the market; there should be no room for doubt and long deliberation in the global risk society.⁴ In this sense, globalization itself favors the expression of international contestation by creating opportunity structures and favoring circumstances for the acts of anti/alternative globalization movements.

      In the ’00s, issues of global justice brought to our attention by social movements have become prominent in contemporary political sociology. The worldwide movement gives hope for social change of established world structures.  This still growing movement is commonly referred to as the “anti-globalization movement”, but calls itself the “global justice movement”. But it is not really a singular movement, rather a “movement of movements”. Such mobilization of social movement networks also shows the growing importance and possibility of movements that surpass national and local borders.⁵ In reality the so-called anti-globalization movement is combined of hundreds of movements that function within one transnational zone, the international arena. However, as a transnational actor the social movements are not global in the sense that their act of resistance is solely based on the location it is tied to. In simpler words, social movements are not global they are local, however their discourse is global, of course as long as it is inter/transnationally relevant.  

      The aim of this paper is therefore to evaluate whether these movements fully express a discourse that is truly global and what is the extent to which transnational movements and international non-governmental organizations play a crucial role in assisting popular campaigns against political oppression, social justice, environmental damage or war. Two examples from the network of anti-globalization movement will be illustrated and examined in order to build a fair understanding of social transnational movements, the extent of their global reach and their political effects.

      However, before an adequate assessment can be conducted it is important to understand what transnational movements represent, and what is their aim and agenda. From the standpoint of modern researches, transnational movements are the so-called new social movements with a more global scope. Given the many aspects of social transformation covered by the expression ‘social movements’ it is not surprising to learn that there are a plethora of definitions and descriptions. Social movement is a loosely organized but sustained a campaign in support of a social goal, typically either the implementation or the prevention of a change in society’s structure or values. Although social movements differ in size, they are all essentially collective. That is, they result from the more or less spontaneous coming together of people whose relationships are not defined by rules and procedures but who merely share a common outlook on society. Charles Tilly defines social movements as a series of contentious performances, displays and campaigns by which ordinary people made collective claims on others⁶. For Tilly, social movement as a concept is a major vehicle for ordinary people's participation in public politics. It is fair to say that as an instrument for participation, social movements are quite a fit for people who want to make a change. However, does mere participation underlines resistance? Will an individual within a collective identity make the desired change and will the impact of a transnational movement be truly global?

      To answer these questions one must account for both theory and practice of social movements in the rapidly globalizing world. There are a number of theories that represent the scientific background for social movements. Sociologists have developed several theories related to social movements⁷. Chronologically they include collective behavior, relative deprivation, value added theory, resource mobilization, frame analysis and the new social movement theory. The theories listed above well represent the nature of social movements. However, as was mentioned earlier the aim of this essay is to evaluate the extent of global reach of transnational movements therefore the main focus will be addressed towards the new social movement theory.

      The term new social movement represents the plethora of social movements that arose around the globe, more notably in the western societies, since the mid 1970s. The new social movement theory when applied to modern social movements draws a rather clear inside picture of the reasons for emergence of such movements and their primary focuses. There are two central claims about the new social movement theory First, that the rise of the post-industrial economy is responsible for a new wave of social movement and second, that those movements are significantly different from previous social movements of the industrial economy. The primary difference is in their goals, as the new movements focus not on issues of materialistic qualities such as economic wellbeing, but on issues related to human right.⁸ From this theory we can draw that the new social movements, thus the transnational movements are in fact a product of globalization and are globalized, yet not global. Moreover, the theory stresses its attention on the fact that new social movements are less political in the sense that they are less direct towards political opposition. Nevertheless, the representation of issues related to social change, such as human rights, may be local and non political, the discourse which takes place in a transnational periphery is highly political and capable of having impact on social and political decision making.

      To back up or hinder these claims of transnational movements being able to influence international politics in a search for social change this essay features two examples of how transnational movement as an entity influences the discourse of social change on a global scale. For better understanding and representation of the concept of resistance in civil society the two examples fall in the category of transnational movements from within the framework of the so-called anti-globalization movement. The examples are: firstly, the Global Justice Movement in theory and practice, secondly, the anti-dam movement in Southern Brazil as a representation of the anti-globalization movement.

      The first example this essay attempts to assess and draw an understanding of is in fact the anti-globalization movement itself or, as also referred to, the Global Justice Movement. As it was mentioned earlier, most of the social movements in modern international relations fall under the category of anti-globalization movements. The rise of the so-called “anti-globalization movement” represents one of the most significant illustrations of social conflict and contentious political behavior of the past several decades. The numerous boisterous and well-attended protest events against neoliberal globalization at the turn of the century, more- over, seemed to provide evidence of the rise of an incipient transnational movement, as from Seattle, to Chiang Mai, to Prague, to Quebec City and finally Genoa, domestic and internationally-represented protests developed solidarities, stirred public debate and attracted larger crowds committed to challenging neo- liberal policies and institutions.⁹ One way of understanding the anti-globalization movement is by looking at how its dynamics were shaped by the overall degree of contest throughout global civil society regarding the supposed advantages of neoliberal economic policies. Moreover, people who concede to the anti-globalization movement tend to stress their focus on criticizing the very core ideas of neoliberalism, thus the globalization. That the world’s economy has been undergoing a neoliberal transformation over the past twenty years is hardly in dispute. Responding to the global economic slowdown in 1970s most of the Northern developed world have undergone a number of rather vital reforms designed to channel the globalization of the worlds economy in the so-called neo-liberal direction. Along undergoing such transformation economically the need for social change was also due. Therefore, such a neoliberal turn in the global economy played an important role in shaping the incidences of national, regional and at times apparently transnational protest, which erupted in the 1990s to challenge the neoliberal globalization paradigm. However, to draw a clearer picture of why neoliberalism in its globalizing context is faced with such tremendous amounts of criticism, perhaps firstly, the common agenda of the anti-globalization movement must be understood which will put a light on reasoning behind actions of Global Justice Movement.  The Global Justice Movement as a ‘movement of movement’ underlines a very wide spectra of approaches in resisting neoliberal policies, however the main focus of the organization is to achieve change in how justice is implemented throughout the world. The movement’s approach transcends left-wing/right-wing designations. They see both conventional capitalism and socialism as being two arms of a philosophy that concentrates power in an elite, to the detriment of society as a whole. Reforming the current money system, to empower each and every person, is a key part of the just.¹⁰ In simpler words, the global movement for justice is an organization that is aimed at challenging the current world economic system in order to attain social change at a transnational level.

      As was mentioned above, the global justice movement itself is a ‘movement of movements’. Therefore, taking into account the anti-dam movement in Brazil, 1979-1999 as an example of such movement in a movement will help this essay evaluate transnational movements with a more empirical approach. Hence, help understanding of the extent on global reach. The anti-dam movement in southern Brazil began in 1979 as a local mobilization to aid peasants affected by the proposed flooding of river valleys by large hydroelectric dams. Framing the issue as a land struggle, local activists took advantage of early openings in a democratic transition and drew on their national and international church networks to defend those affected.¹¹This particular case represents how local activists at the time were able to form a network that would evolve in a social movement and become a transnational movement. Over time, since 1979, the conflict regarding hydroelectric dams in southern Brazil has attained a transnational status, largely with the help of local activists who acted through a social movement that consequently became transnational network. In the late 1980s local activists have this struggle onto the international arena by forging a new ideology that linked class and environmental concerns.¹² This shows that while governments fail to address the problem, since they generally do not consider social change in favor of economic change, transnational movements succeed to address the problem in the right light, thus, bringing attention of the international community. By providing an international aspect to the events in southern Brazil, local activists have managed to move the issue from a dead point. Creating a larger transnational network through acquiring support of various transnational movement organizations has broadened the possibilities for justice. Not only the local activists called out for a change, they in fact have successfully implemented what theoretically is called collective action through resource mobilization. However, the anti-dam case, as any other case, it would be a crucial mistake to consider that shifts in identities and frames were made lightly. The example materials reveal that both the land struggle frame and the later shift to a more ecological frame were tied to deep and complex ideological understandings of the political and economic world.¹³ The struggle to shift identities and reevaluate ideological norms is very complex, yet possible. Therefore, one may say that local struggles regarding social change and resistance are capable of achieving a transnational status.

      This essay has focused its attention on both, theory and practice of transnational movements, movements that represent a discourse in social change.  Two major examples were given in order to explain and understand these particular social movements. As a result, it is fair to conclude that in a rapidly globalizing world, social movements take part in affecting the outcomes of international politics. Both theoretically and practically, social movements prove that social change is possible and achievable if applied to with the right set of tools for implementation. For example, as it was in the example of the anti-dam movement where local activists have succeeded to conceptualize the problem of hydroelectric dams in a manner that is transnational. Transnationalism as a concept grew rapidly in the last thirty years bringing more and more issues into the international light. All of the arguments stated above show that transnational movements are growing in numbers and effectiveness. Nowadays most issues related to social change find attention derived from a cross-border network of social movements, it is notable that even though transnational networks are diverse and poorly integrated they still bear global compliance and are to be considered an impact on a truly global level. Moreover, current prognosis states that social movements will continue to develop and evolve into transnational movements whether for purposes of resistance or not, thus bearing a greater impact on world politics and the world itself. 
 
 
 

References: 

Carlos, R.S., Milani, Ruthy Laniado, 2006. Transnational social movements in a globalizing world: A methodological approach based on the analysis of the World Social Forum,  <http://www.cccg.umontreal.ca/pdf/laniado%20et%20milani_en.pdf>, [20^th November, 2011] 

Buechler, S, M. (1995) New Social Movement Theories in The Sociological Quarterly, < http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1995.tb00447.x/abstract>, [22^nd November, 2011] 

Della Porta, Donatella, (2006). Transnational Movements and Global Activism, Rowman and Littlefield, New York, 2006

Diana Kendall, Sociology In Our Times, Thomson Wadsworth, 2005, < http://books.google.com/books/about/Sociology_in_Our_Times.html?id=vsbhwKM3QcMC>, [21^st November, 2011]

Global Justice Movement Website,  <http://www.globaljusticemovement.org/index.htm>, [24^th November, 2011] 
 

Jackie, G. Smith, Hank Johnston, Globalization and Resistance: Transnational dimensions of social movements, Rowman and Littlefield, 2002 <http://books.google.com/books?id=9UGLVh4JifkC&source=gbs_navlinks_s>, [22^nd November, 2011] 

Louise Amoore, (2005) Global Resistance Reader: Cultures of resistance: technologies, tactics, tensions. pp. 357 
 

Nelson A. Pichardo, New Social movements: A Critical Review, Annual Review of Sociology, 1997. < http://www.uclan.ac.uk/ahss/education_social_sciences/social_science/society_lifestyles/files/nrm15.pdf>, [19^th November, 2011] 

Kate Nash, Contemporary Political Sociology: Globalization, Politics, and Power, Blackwell publishers Ltd., 2010 pp. 88 

Saskia Sassen, Local Actors in Global Politics, 2008 < http://www.isiswomen.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=301&Itemid=191>, [23, November, 2011] 

Stellan Vinthagen, 2006. Transnational Movement Strategies: Some reflections, <

http://www.civilresistance.info/files/Stellan%20Vinthagen.pdf>, [17^th November, 2011]