Suchergebnisse

Un certain nombre d'études ont porté sur différents aspects de l'engagement et du désengagement des groupes clandestins, exclusifs et stigmatisés. Pourtant la recherche s'est concentrée sur les processus de recrutement et de radicalisation plus que sur le désengagement des organisations radicales. Dans ce texte, l'on s'appuie sur une approche en termes de carrière afin de proposer un modèle théorique du processus de désengagement des organisations radicales qui articule les niveaux micro (dispositions, socialisation), meso (façonnage organisationnel) et macro (contexte politique, répression et opportunités). La littérature opère souvent une distinction analytique entre ces trois niveaux d'analyse pour définir des séries de facteurs de l'engagement ou du désengagement, sans pourtant offrir une explication convaincante de la manière dont ils se combinent et se codéterminent dans le temps. Ici, nous faisons plutôt le choix de nous concentrer sur deux séries de facteurs centraux pour déterminer leur influence sur le processus de désengagement individuel : les effets complexes du façonnage organisationnel et les effets ambivalents de la répression et de la criminalisation des activités radicales.

Street demonstrations have received the lion's share of scholarly attention to collective action. This article starts by returning to this research in order to raise some methodological questions about how to collect data on demonstrations and on the validity of the subsequent results. Next, based on my own research on demonstrations, I suggest some questions that deserve to be analyzed. In particular, I argue that we should work more on the psychological effects of participation in demonstrations. One potential line of investigation would be to more systematically explore the socializing effects of political events. Indeed, vivid political events should be important catalysts because they can have significant effects. Events may have an impact at any age but socializing effects will differ based on one's position in the life cycle, from conversion for younger participants to substantiation for older participants. I hypothesize, in line with Mannheim's (1952) "impressionable years" model of socialization research, that people especially recall events as important if they happened in their adolescence or early adulthood.

Street demonstrations have received the lion's share of scholarly attention to collective action. This article starts by returning to this research in order to raise some methodological questions about how to collect data on demonstrations and on the validity of the subsequent results. Next, based on my own research on demonstrations, I suggest some questions that deserve to be analyzed. In particular, I argue that we should work more on the psychological effects of participation in demonstrations. One potential line of investigation would be to more systematically explore the socializing effects of political events. Indeed, vivid political events should be important catalysts because they can have significant effects. Events may have an impact at any age but socializing effects will differ based on one's position in the life cycle, from conversion for younger participants to substantiation for older participants. I hypothesize, in line with Mannheim's (1952) "impressionable years" model of socialization research, that people especially recall events as important if they happened in their adolescence or early adulthood. Adapted from the source document.

À partir du constat selon lequel la définition de ce qu'il faut entendre par mouvements sociaux ne fait pas l'objet d'un consensus dans la littérature, l'auteur pose la question du périmètre de la sociologie des mobilisations et, partant, la question de l'objet pour cette sous-discipline. Le but visé n'est pas de proposer une nouvelle définition des mouvements sociaux, mais plutôt de proposer un petit exercice de vigilance épistémologique consistant à montrer comment les définitions utilisées peuvent générer tout un ensemble d'angles morts. Après un rappel succinct de l'état du champ sur cette question de la définition des mouvements sociaux, cet essai s'organise autour de trois interrogations. D'une part, les mouvements sociaux peuvent-ils se définir par leur orientation vers le changement et, si oui, de quel changement s'agit-il ? D'autre part, peut-on définir les mouvements sociaux par les acteurs qui les portent et, si oui, quels types d'acteurs faut-il retenir ? Enfin, peut-on définir les mouvements sociaux par leur modus operandi et, si oui, quels modes d'action doit on retenir ?

Based on the fact that the definition of what one usually defines as a social movement is not consensual in the literature, the author discusses the question of the perimeter of the field of studies of social movement. By so doing, he addresses the question of the construction of the object. The aim of the paper is by no way to offer one additional definition of what is to be considered as a social movement, but instead to propose an exercise of epistemological vigilance showing that current definitions can generate a certain amount of dead angles. After a brief overview of the state of the art, the paper addresses three questions: Can social movements be defined by their orientation towards change and, if so, what kind of change? Can social movements be defined by the type of actors concerned and, if so, who are these actors? Can social movements be defined by their modes of action and, if so, what are these modes of action? Adapted from the source document.

In that paper we propose a gendered approach to social movements and political activism, based on a critical review of the litterature in French and English. In social movements and militantism studies, gender lines of division are most of the time ignored. Social movements are perceived as being « gender neutral ». However, that dimension is a determinant factor of collective action at the macro level of political opportunities and contexts, at the meso level of organisations and their modes of functionning, at the micro level of the logics of individual commitment and the division of militant labor.