The black flag means negation, anger, outrage, mourning, beauty, hope, and the fostering and sheltering of new forms of human life and relationship on and with the earth. This book aims to destroy many of the assumptions and stereotypes about anarchism, anarchists, and anarchist movements. It introduces Mario Diani's definition of a social movement: networks of individuals and organizations, united by some shared identity, that engage in extra-institutional action with the interest of changing society. Social movements must be composed of individuals. The book provides new insights into individual participants in anarchist movements by investigating what the micro-level characteristics of contemporary anarchists are, and how these characteristics differ from those of anarchists in past movements. The anarchist movement can be interrogated from many vantage points (especially macro- and meso-analyses), in both longitudinal and cross-sectional contexts. The book explores the usefulness (or lack thereof) of social movement theories for understanding anarchist movements. It challenges the assumption that the state is a strategic location of opportunity from the perspective of radical, anti-state movements. The essential dimensions of "new social movement" (NSM) theories are discussed, with highlights on the differences between the contemporary anarchist movement and other NSMs. The book also explores ideas from major social capital theorists, and considers the value of social capital. Whereas most sociological research on anti-authoritarian diffusion and isomorphism has focused on mainstream organizations or reformist social movements, anarchist movements pose a particular challenge to the earlier findings focused on the non-anarchists.
reality, this is far from true. Anarchists prefer to work on projects, in groups,
or within relationships where their participation (and everyone else’s) is
voluntary, not coerced, and where the power relations are equally balanced
and power is not monopolized by a small group of people (Ehrlich 1996;
Graeber 2009; Milstein 2010; Shantz 2010; Ward 1996). This is not only
possible, but is the standard operating procedure in anarchist movements.
The social phenomenon at the crux of this conception of organization is
, like risks, scale,
strategy, and timing of movements. In subsequent chapters I more intensively apply social movement theories to anarchist movements, specifically
political opportunity, new social movements, and socialcapitaltheories (Chapters 5, 6, and 7). An appropriate orientation is taken toward
PART II: THEORETICAL INTERPRETATION
developing “better theories”: conserving and improving what is good (of
both American and European scholarly origin), and building better theories in response to currently unaddressed concerns. Finally, this chapter
interaction pattern between students and their teachers
affect students’ development of generalised trust? We have
also borrowed and adapted explanations from the literature
on socialcapitaltheory. One of these factors is the fairness
of institutions. Does it matter if school is perceived as just
and fair by students? Emotional engagement, flexibility and
adaptation to the situation (what has been called ‘the logic of
care’ – see Chapter 8) are other factors that may have an impact
on generalised trust. If the school environment is caring, does
that have any effect on
Hanna Bäck, Carina Gunnarson and Magdalena Inkinen
studies on socialcapital.
Theories have focused on factors such as the design of public
institutions, for example the government and administration,
or on the universality of welfare systems.2 The relevance of
education for trust is generally acknowledged in the literature.3
Education is by far the most important predictor to civic engage
ment; as Putnam argues, ‘highly educated people are much
more likely to be joiners and trusters’.4 Still, there has been
little research on school as a builder of generalised trust. It is
highly plausible that schools do have a
. Gewirtz, D. Halpin and M.
Dickson, ‘Paving a “third way”? A policy trajectory analysis of Education Action Zones’, Research Papers in Education, 19:4 (2004), 453–75; S.
Gewirtz, M. Dickson, S. Power, D. Halpin and G. Whitty, ‘The deployment
of socialcapitaltheory in educational policy and provision: the case of
Education Action Zones in England’, British Educational Research Journal,
31:6 (2005), 651–73.
20 D. Reay, ‘Gendering Bourdieu’s concepts of capitals? Emotional capital,
women and social class’, in L. Adkins and B. Skeggs (eds), Feminism after
social networks vital to democratic civil society (World Bank, 2005b).
Central to this approach has been socialcapitaltheory. Fukuyama, for
example, when addressing an IMF seminar on the reforms, suggested that
‘the economic function of social capital is to reduce the transaction costs
associated with formal coordination mechanisms like contracts, hierarchies,
bureaucratic rules, and the like’ (Fukuyama, 1999). The phraseology suggests that the second generation of reforms is seen as a developmental tool
set within a Weberian framework of state and
involvement in mundane volunteer
groups such as ‘bird-watching societies and soccer clubs leads to a high
level of civic engagement, democratic politics and high-quality government performance’ (Levi 1996: 47–8).2
Such interpretations of socialcapitaltheory do attempt to resolve the
traditional understandings of the ‘dilemma of collective action’ that questions why individuals would invest in group activity which might not
immediately benefit them, using an economic understanding of rewards
received. In contrast, social movement perspectives of participation are