Antiwar Politics and Paths of Activist Participation on the Left
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Antiwar Politics and Paths of Activist Participation on the Left Fabio Rojas Associate Professor of Sociology Indiana University [email protected] Michael T. Heaney Assistant Professor of Organizational Studies and Political Science University of Michigan [email protected] Paper Presented at the 70th Annual Midwest Political Science Association Conference, April 12-15, 2012, Chicago, Illinois Abstract: As social movements ebb and flow, they create opportunities for activists to switch topics or participate in multiple movements. Many activists seize these opportunities to follow paths of involvement in a sequence of social movements. Using a survey of 691 activists at the 2010 US Social Forum, we show that antiwar protest is the most popular entry point into activism for progressive/left activists. We then use sequence analysis to demonstrate that activists who have participated in the antiwar movement are more likely "spill over" into other fields than are activists involved in other progressive/left movements. These results reveal how the landscape of progressive/left activism is structured, in part, by the distinctive qualities of the antiwar movement. Keywords: Activism, social movements, antiwar movement, sequence analysis Acknowledgements: Both authors contributed equally to this manuscript. For assistance administering surveys at the 2010 US Social Forum, the authors thank Jack Masteller, Jacob Smith, Jessica McClain, Mary Akchurin, Michael Sullivan, Min Joo Kim, Sahana Rajan, and Todd Schifeling. For helpful comments, authors thank Robert Dishell, Craig Kaplan, Kelsey Lee, Michelle Rubin, and Kendall Witmer. Earlier versions of this manuscript were presented at symposia at Southern Illinois University, Purdue University, Carnegie Mellon University, and Indiana University. I think that it was having come of age as a young adult in the context of the antiwar movement [during the 1960s], that so infused my own sensibilities. It so shaped my commitments, my outlook on the world, and my interest in what I wanted to do with my life, that in that way, the work I do today is very much tied to what I did some 40 years ago. Leslie Cagan National Coordinator, United for Peace and Justice Leslie Cagan is a stalwart of the antiwar movement. Born in 1947, she was raised by an activist family and attended "Ban the Bomb" rallies in the 1950s. As a college student at New York University, she was the key organizer for her campus' sizeable delegation to the October 1967 March on the Pentagon. Cagan was a lead organizer of an anti-nuclear rally in Central Park attended by hundreds of thousands of people and National Coordinator of the National Campaign for Peace in the Middle East during the Persian Gulf War in 1990-1991. With the anticipation of a new war in Iraq, Cagan became the National Coordinator of United for Peace and Justice in 2002, the nation's largest and broadest peace coalition during the presidency of George W. Bush, a role that she filled until 2009 (Cagan 2008). Despite Cagan's impeccable credentials as an antiwar activist, it would be a mistake to think of her only as an antiwar activist. She has managed political campaigns and been active in other social movements, such as the lesbian-gay rights movement and the campaign to normalize U.S. relations with Cuba (Hedges 2003). Like many peace activists, Cagan steered her efforts toward other causes during times of relative peace. Yet her antiwar stance informs these efforts: "the undercurrent of it all is that . sense that without peace, and until there is peace, it'll be virtually impossible to really bring full economic justice, social justice” (Cagan 2008). Like Cagan, many activists bring their experience with antiwar activism to their involvement in other movements (Carroll and Ratner 1996). 1 Activism changes people's lives. Previous scholarship demonstrates that the paths that people take into and through activism affect how their lives are changed (Blee 2011; Fisher 2006; Fisher and McInerney 2012; Han 2009; McAdam 1989, 1999; Munson 2010; Viterna 2006). For example, how people are recruited into activism (Fisher 2006; Fisher and McInerney 2012) and the organizations that they join (Han 2009; Munson 2008) makes a difference for how long they remain involved in activism and what types of activities they engage in. These studies, however, fail to distinguish between movements in terms of how participation in one movement may influence an individual's activist path differently than participation in another movement. Given that activists live in a world of multiple, interacting social movements (Evans and Kay 2008; Isaac and Christiansen 2002; Isaac, McDonald, and Lukasik 2006; McAdam 1995; Meyer and Staggenborg 1996; Meyer and Tarrow 1998; Meyer and Whittier 1994; Minkoff 1997; Voss and Sherman 2000), the question arises as to whether or not the sequence through which activists come into contact with movements matters for how they participate in activism. The antiwar movement is a very common gateway into progressive/left activism. In this article, we argue that activists who are initiated into activism through antiwar events have different patterns of movement participation than those who are initiated into activism through another movement. This article proceeds, first, by considering the extant scholarship on paths to and through activism. These paths are shaped by the ebb and flow of particular movements. As protest cycles play out, activists are presented with opportunities to adopt new issues or migrate to other movements. Special attention is paid to the antiwar movement and how its mobilization capacity is affected by the nature of its main policy issue, war. Second, we argue that antiwar activists are likely to pursue paths that diverge from those of other progressive/left activists. Third, we examine the methods and rationale for conducting a survey of 691 activists who 2 attended the 2010 US Social Forum, one of the largest assemblies of progressive/left activists in the United States. Fourth, we explain sequence analysis as an approach to analyzing data on activist paths. Fifth, we demonstrate the distinctiveness of antiwar activists’ paths by estimating a series of regression models on the results of the sequence analysis. We find that antiwar activist paths are more likely to "spill over" into other movements than are other progressive/left activist paths. The article concludes by explaining the aggregate consequences that these paths have for the broader environment of progressive/left activists. Activist Paths and Movement Participation Social movements have the potential to change the world by influencing public opinion and state policies. They also have the potential to change the lives of people who participate in them. By drawing people into social activism, movements, in turn, expose people to even further opportunities for political participation (Meyer and Whittier 1994; Carrol and Ratner 1996; Osa 2003; Ansell 2003; Hadden and Tarrow 2007). Over time, individual activists may develop a multitude of ties to different movements. We call an individual’s sequential participation in one or more movements an "activist path." Activist paths matter for a number of reasons. Initial mobilization may be linked to long- term behaviors, whether they are political (Demerath, Marwell, and Aiken 1971; Marwell, Demerath, and Aiken 1987) or personal, such as having children (McAdam 1989, 1999). The depth of participation in a movement may be correlated with political behavior later in life, such as the strength of left-leaning attitudes and the extent of political participation (McAdam 1999: 121-2; Giugni 2007, 2008). 3 Scholars draw attention to the complexity and contingency of activist biographies. Jasper (1999: 210-28) recounts the story of Geoff Meredith, a man who was involved in environmental protest movements. Meredith had an extensive history that touched on support for AIDS patients, avant-garde art, and disabled rights, which depended on chance meetings with other activists. Carroll and Ratner (1996) find that a significant proportion of Vancouver-area activists participated in more than one type of movement organization (e.g., indigenous rights and labor groups). Rojas and Heaney (2009) report that 79% of antiwar protesters in the 2000s had participated in non-antiwar movements, suggesting a significant degree of "spillout" from established movements into new movements (see also Hadden and Tarrow 2007) Individuals’ characteristics may be linked with specific types of activist biographies. Fisher and McInerney (2012) find that people who are recruited to participate in an organization through their social ties are less likely to continue to participate in the organization than people that did not have prior connections within the organization. Corrigall-Brown (2012: 53) documents that religiosity, income, and political knowledge are significant factors that predict an activist’s path. Furthermore, her research demonstrates that activists vary in their persistence, with some activists maintaining heightened participation in multiple movements and others participating on a more episodic basis. Social contexts play a critical role in shaping activist paths. Viterna (2006) discusses the lives of women in Salvadoran revolutionary groups and finds that factors such as living in an urban environment predict mode of participation. She argues that people who enter activism from different starting points have distinct experiences. Caren, Ghoshal, and