Select only ONE of these questions to answer. Your answer should be between 2-3 page in length.1. Choose a social movement. Explain why you chose this particular social movement. Using the terms and concepts from chapter 9, explain how the movement originated, how it gained momentum, and whether or not the social movement succeeded or failed. Be sure to include what theory or theories you think best explain why individuals joined the movement and why some did not. Also, be sure to include the resources employed by the group and how they contributed to the success or failure of the movement.
2. Using the internet, conduct research on the history of drunk driving laws in the U.S. Be sure to use the terms and concepts discussed in chapter 8. Discuss where and when drunk driving laws originated in the U.S.? When and why did these laws become more prevalent in the U.S.? Which groups were instrumental in getting these laws passed? How and why were they successful? What role did the media play in this process? Why is the blood alcohol set at .08 in most jurisdictions, and how and why did it get there to that level?
3. Using the internet, go to https://www.hallmarkecards.com/ Review 10 sympathy cards of your choosing. Briefly describe the wording in each card related to sympathy. Separate and categorize the wording in each card that pertains to sympathy. Using the terms and concepts from chapter 7, discuss what you learned about emotional culture as it pertains to sympathy.
Lecture – Collective Behavior & Social Movements
Symbols, Selves, and Social Reality
Chapter Nine: Collective Behavior and Social Movements
Introduction
During the summer of 2008, the residents near the intersection of F Street and McWilliams, in the historically African American community of West Las Vegas, Nevada, awoke one morning to the roar of large construction vehicles. Truck after truck was hauling in tons of dirt. Soon, a sign appeared saying the intersection was closed. Curious residents began calling city officials, their elected representatives and the Nevada Department of Transportation to find out what was going on.
The responses, or lack thereof, caused the residents to begin to panic. F Street was a main arterial between the community and the redeveloping downtown section of Las Vegas. Older residents recalled how over the years, the city and the state had conspired to close seven streets in the community. Was this just another attempt to alienate and isolate this economically challenged community? Some were being told the closure was temporary, while others heard rumors the street closure would be permanent.
Not satisfied with the responses they were getting from city officials, a few concerned neighbors decided to form a small community group to look into the matter. Two people in particular, Trish Geran and Shondra Summers-Armstrong, were asked to lead the group. With few resources and no political clout, the small band of residents began to fight back.
The community group continued to grow and soon became the F Street Coalition. I was sitting at home one January morning in 2009, when I saw a notice in the paper that the group was holding a community meeting to discuss the street closure. Not being aware of the history, I wondered to myself “what’s the big deal? Can’t they just take another street?” So, I attended that first meeting, learned why the community was so upset, and decided to join in their struggle. Thus started my journey that would eventually become my doctoral dissertation.
In the beginning, the group fought to prevent the closure of the street. But, it soon became apparent that city and state officials had secretly conspired to permanently close F Street, under the guise of expanding the interstate. The street closure included a fifty-foot concrete wall that would prevent residents from commuting between their community and downtown Las Vegas.
We held rallies, attended city council meetings, wrote letters, and encourage other more organized groups to join our fight. Those who lived outside the community, predominantly whites, resisted reopening the street. This included many prominent members of Southern Nevada, including city councilman Bob Coffin and then-Mayor Oscar Goodman. Not getting any satisfaction, we decided to hold a march on the Las Vegas Strip in March of 2009. There we were, about 100 protesters all dressed in red and carrying signs, marching down the Las Vegas Strip and being assisted by the police. Dumfounded tourists stood by in awe of this seemingly unusual occurrence. The protest march seemed to be the catalyst that allegedly forced the hotel and casino magnates to place angry phone calls to our state representatives.
The very next day, Nevada legislative majority leader State Senator Steven Horsford called one of the group’s members and set up a meeting to discuss our grievances. Horsford, the first African American majority leader had at one time lived in West Las Vegas. But until then, had ignored our calls for help. Horsford took our cause to the legislature and in June, 2009, both houses passed a bill that overrode then-Governor Gibbons veto, which called for reopening F Street and provided additional funding for community improvements.
What started as a small, relatively powerless community group, transformed into a force for change. For me, at the time a white middle-aged graduate student became my award winning doctoral dissertation and a book: Community Action against Racism in West Las Vegas: The F Street Wall and the Women Who Brought it Down (Lexington Books, 2014). When people come together as a group and engage in efforts to formulate a response to problematic conditions, we call this collective action.
Collective Action: Action that people engage in as a group and formulate as a response to problematic conditions, often in opposition to existing societal norms.
Those of us who study collective action, distinguish between the two forms: collective behavior, and social movements.
Collective Behavior: Relatively spontaneous social action, often in contrast to social norms, taken by a large number of people who have gathered to work out in a joint response to an ambiguous situation.
Collective behavior can include such events as riots, panics, rumors, and even fads. The key characteristic of these types of collective behaviors is that they seldom lack a high degree of organization or structure. They often begin as a spontaneous reaction to an event or situation, by a few people, and then they may evolve into a much larger, somewhat loosely organized group. Another characteristic of collective behavior is that the members of these groups may have different motives or agendas that connect them together.
An example of collective behavior can be seen in the recent events that have broken out in Ferguson, Missouri following the shooting of Michael Brown. What began as a few people taking to the streets to protest, quickly erupted into a riot that included fires, looting, and violence. Not everyone involved in the rioting was to blame for all of the destruction that resulted, and some of those who were may have had alternative motives beyond the injustice that triggered the event. These alternative motives are known as emergent norms.
Emergent Norm Theory: A perspective that sees a crowd as a diverse and heterogeneous group of people who, in the face of ambiguous stimuli or circumstances, develop a group norm that establishes a framework for action and provides a sense of uniformity.
In the previous example of Ferguson, despite the myriad reasons for the protestors to get involved, the emergent norm seemed to be their hatred and mistrust for what they perceived to be a corrupt and racist police force. Because a crowd situation is somewhat ambiguous, most participants are uncertain both about what they should be doing at the moment and what agenda they should pursue in the future. As a result, a few visible or outspoken members can define proper behavior by advancing a framework for action. Because the majority of the crowd may lack strong feelings about any particular course of action the course followed is proposed by those who assume a leadership role and suggest behavior that seems appropriate (p. 274).
Collective behavior, then is not always associated with violence. Critics of the Black Lives Matter movement, for example, have noted that this same group does nothing to protest the hundreds of killings that go on every year in Chicago. Yet, they have been criticized for provoking violent confrontations that target victims beyond just the police. Their protests are often associated with looting, beatings, and other acts of violence against those who have not association with the initial aims of the protest. Critics also point out that when a white police officer is killed by a black man, rather than resorting to violence, whites tend to hold prayer vigils, while black protest groups often result in violence.
There are times when collective behavior seems to be completely spontaneous and without organization or purpose other than to use violence as means to protest a grievance. When this occurs, we once again see actions that clearly violate mainstream cultural norms. This is the case with riots.
Riots: A form of collective behavior in which a large number of people assemble for the purpose of protesting a grievance and from which a violent disturbance may emerge.
Riots most often take shape as the result of an expression of unaddressed grievances between a minority community and the local authorities. As conflicts between members of the oppressed community and the authorities escalate, rioting is likely to occur. Riots tend to evolve through four distinct phases: a precipitating event that signifies an injustice to the community; confrontation between those who want to instigate a riot and the authorities who are called in to prevent or dissuade rioters; the carnival phase when crowds reassemble away from their original gathering place once police interfere; and, a siege marks the final phase. A siege occurs when police or other local authorities attempt to suppress rioters by overwhelming force.
There are also times when collective behavior is characterized not by acts of violence or outward protests, but by verbal communications, such as rumors.
Rumor: A piece of information that is neither substantiated nor refuted and is driven by a search for meaning, clarification, and closure.
Rumors have been known to precipitate actions of collective behavior, such as was pointed out in the Zoot Suit Riots in Los Angeles, in 1943. (See pages 276-279). The key characteristic of a rumor is that it has the potential to be true. It must sound plausible. For example, if I told you that the Los Angeles Lakers had just signed a 93-year-old grandmother to be their starting center, you would know that was impossible. But if you were told that a certain star player for another NBA team was rumored to be interested in being traded to the Lakers, you might just believe it, even if the story was false.
Typically, rumors involve three attributes or processes: leveling, sharpening, and assimilation.
Leveling: The process during the repeated telling of a rumor in which some of the details of the original communication drop out.
Sharpening: The process in which some of the original words and phrases initially used in telling of a rumor are highlighted and given additional emphasis as the rumor is retold.
Assimilation: The process that occurs during rumor transmission in which the original details of the story are modified or transformed so that they fit into the tellers’ preconceived biases or expectations.
Rumor makes an interesting research topic for symbolic interactionists and social psychologists, because of the nature of the social interaction required to process the information. What begins as a plausible communication between two or more people, has the potential to evolve into actionable behavior. If someone begins a rumor that a potential romantic partner has a serious STD, it may well affect your sexual interest in them, despite whether it is true or not. If you hear a rumor that there is going to be a mass shooting at your child’s school tomorrow, you may decide to keep your child at home that day. Thus, even if they are not based in fact, the assumptions behind rumor, like any definition of the situation, can prove to be consequential (p. 283).
Another form of collective behavior is panic.
Panic: Episodes in which members of a crowd respond to an immediate threat with highly charged emotional behavior that increases rather than reduces the danger faced by themselves or others.
Many years ago, I was attending an outdoor concert in a park. It was a very large crowd and many in attendance were under the influence of alcohol and/or marijuana. As the main band began to play, there was suddenly a number of popping noises that sounded like gunfire. Many in the crowd began to run in all directions. People were being pushed and knocked over in the ensuing panic, with numerous serious injuries occurring. As it turned out, the popping noises were from some fireworks that had been set off to coincide with the band’s opening number.
What distinguishes a panic from a riot is that in a panic, people tend to define the situation as a legitimate threat to their physical safety. This is true, despite the fact that the alleged threat may only pose a minimal danger if any. In my personal example, the popping noises symbolize gunfire to some people in the crowd. Their definition of the situation caused them and others to react to the perceived threat in a way that far exceeded the initial cause of their reaction, thus escalating the real danger of physical harm.
Social Movements
In this final section of the course, we are going to discuss social movements.

Social Movement: A collection of individuals who organize together to achieve or prevent some social or political change.

Another way to define a social movement is as a consciously organized attempt outside of established institutions to enhance or resist change through group action. When I was working on my doctoral dissertation about the West Las Vegas community’s reaction to the F Street closure, I would occasionally, and mistakenly, refer to their protest as a social movement. It wasn’t until one of my professors began to review my presentations that he corrected me on the use of the term: social movement. The key characteristics of a social movement are its size and prominence. For example, 100 people protesting a street closure in a community, even one as large as Las Vegas, is relatively small by comparison to the Civil Rights Movement.

People join social movements for many reasons. The two most prominent theories involve mass society theory and relative deprivation theory.

Mass Society Theory: Social isolation prompts involvement in collective behavior and social movements.

Mass society theory argues that some individuals may feel isolated or as social loners. They see the social movement as a way of belonging to something or as a way to make friends. Their membership in a social movement may provide a sense of identity as well. Many social movements are characterized in symbolic fashion. Those interested in preserving and protecting the environment are often referred to as “tree huggers,” for example. Those opposed to abortion are referred to as “pro-life.”

Relative Deprivation Theory: The feeling by individuals that they are deprived relative to some other group or to some other state they have not yet reached.

Relative deprivation theory fits well with those social movements that are associated with social reform. This would include the civil rights movement, gay rights, women’s rights, disabled rights, etc. When we look at many of the major social inequalities that were addressed in the 20th century, we see that the majority of them were focused on improving social conditions for previously oppressed minority groups. More recently, we can use relative deprivation theory to analyze the ever-growing dissatisfaction with the wealth gap in the U. S.

Regardless of which theoretical perspective one chooses to analyze a social movement membership, researchers tend to agree that people join social movements for two basic reasons: 1) the relationship they have with other members and 2) the ideology of the movement. The more likely an individual has friends or associates who are already part of a social movement, coupled with a shared belief in the cause, the more likely they are to join.

However, despite the intentions of the membership, most social movements will fail if they do not generate the resources necessary to sustain it. Social movement participation, growth, and success depends largely on resource mobilization.

Resource Mobilization Theory: A theory that stresses access to resources is crucial to an aspiring movement and that social movements can only grow when a committed group of individuals is willing to acquire and use resources on its behalf.

Resource mobilization theory is the view that social movements are a rational response to perceived grievances. Their success depends on whether social movement leaders can mobilize the necessary resources. Most often these resources are financial or involve the use of facilities. But they can also be found in the talents and abilities of others who can prepare agendas, manage meetings, balance budgets, recruit members, create websites, or raise funding.

In the F Street Coalition, we had people like Trish Geran, who had experience leading groups of people and she had significant political and social contacts both within and outside of the community. We had others who were able to recruit powerful organized groups to join us. One member was adept at creating web sites and merging email lists. I wrote five articles in the newspaper, in response to derogatory articles written by others. But the key to any successful social movement is to affect change by and through political action. In our case, it wasn’t until the state legislature got involved that we began to sense the tide had turned to our favor, and the wall eventually came tumbling down.