Social movements are phenomena that defy clear definition. They have an observable life, albeit one not completely quantifiable, which is characterized by the sustained interaction of individuals. They are probably best understood as fluid amalgams whose size, constitution, and course is determined largely by the social, cultural, and political terrain over which they pass, and which they stimulate and absorb. They are composites whose memberships are diverse and in flux and whose efforts, strategies, and goals are neither static, unambiguous, nor uncontested. But they represent a considerable and increasing weight in political affairs and they evidence discernible direction. With this in mind, I investigate the challenge offered to the theory and practice of world politics by certain contemporary social movements, in particular, the transnational peace and environmental movements. The literature on social movements is vast and growing. But these movements receive cursory treatment within the field of international politics. Their amorphous nature and diffused effects allow them to be ignored due to a traditional preference for more easily identifiable actors and events. However, the study of contemporary social movements offers much insight into the issues and dilemmas of global affairs. The analysis offered here is largely conceptual. It is not a systematic account of the practical alternatives to traditional forms of international relations and security promoted by the peace movements, nor is it an account of the practical alternatives to ecologically destructive policies and lifestyles made available and promoted by the environmental movements. An understanding of the specific merits, dangers,
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Leslie Paul Thiele (1993) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: