The discussion below is taken with permission from the PRA publication: Deliberate Differences: Progressive and Conservative Campus Activism, by Pam Chamberlain (Somerville, MA: 2004):

Ideology

When we speak of conservatism or liberalism or socialism we are talking about a structured way of seeing how the world works. Oliver and Johnston describe ideology as “a system of meaning that couples assertions and theories about the nature of social life with values and norms relevant to promoting or resisting social change.”[108] In developing this concise definition, they drew on a longer definition by Wilson, who, in 1973, described ideology as “a set of beliefs about the social world and how it operates, containing statements about the rightness of certain social arrangements and what action would be undertaken in light of those statements.”

As Wilson explains, “An ideology is both a cognitive map of sets of expectations and a scale of values in which standards and imperatives are proclaimed. Ideology thus serves both as a clue to understanding and as a guide to action, developing in the mind of its adherents an image of the process by which desired changes can best be achieved.”[109]

Frames

In sociology the idea of studying “frames” has allowed scholars to better understand how social movements gain the attention and loyalty of groups of people in a society.[110] Frames help translate ideologies into action by crafting culturally-appropriate perspectives from which to view a struggle over power.[111]

According to Klandermans, the “social construction of collective action frames,” involves:

• “public discourse, that is, the interface of media discourse and interpersonal interaction”;

• “persuasive communication during mobilization campaigns by movement organizations, their opponents and countermovement organizations”;

• “consciousness raising during episodes of collective action.”[112]

Frames can be constructed to appeal to different audiences, including leaders, followers, potential recruits, and the public.

Narratives

Narratives are stories circulated within a social movement. The study of “narratives” reveals much about how a social movement identifies heroes and villains.[114] According to Davis, when a social movement participant uses a narrative, “past events are selected and configured into a plot” in a way that “portrays them as a meaningful sequence and schematic whole with a beginning, middle, and end.”[115] Narratives also inform movement participants by providing a script that connects them to a past, present, and future, and teaches them about what roles and actions are valued.

“In telling the story of our becoming, as an individual, a nation, a people, we establish who we are,” explains Polletta. “Narratives may be employed strategically to strengthen a collective identity but they may also precede and make possible the development of a coherent community, nation, or collective actor.”[116] Narratives involve three points of view, Polletta observes, “those of narrator, protagonist, and audience”; this “contributes to the formation and sustenance of collective identities” necessary for a successful social movement.[117] Narratives involve the audience in a dynamic relationship with the narrator and portray the protagonist in a positive or negative light.

The study of narratives reveals much about how heroes and villains are identified by a social movement. The way narratives are constructed can either assist in unraveling systems of oppression or merely replicate existing paradigms of dominance.[118] In practical terms, any person in a social movement can tell a story about how they are a victim of unfairness. Sometimes these stories reveal unfair systems and structures of inequality. Sometimes they describe the incident of inequality, while framing the story in a way that obscures what caused the unfairness, and imply that nothing can be done about this inequity. Sometimes they tell the story in a way that enables people or groups who already have unfair power and privilege in a society to portray themselves as the underdog and claim they are victims of unfairness. A striking anecdote might, therefore, be woven into a narrative to imply that a single incident represents a universal truth.

To check out the footnotes [in brackets], you can read the PDF file of the report online. The above section was carved out of a study paper on social movement theory written by Nikhil Aziz and I for PRA.

If we understand how various sectors of the Religious Right uses ideology, frames, and narratives, we can develop more effective startegies and tactics to challenge them.

Next time, the building blocks of a successful social movement.

Ground Rules and Tips for Challenging the Right

Digg
del.icio.us
Newsvine
Reddit
stumbleupon
Facebook