A central issue about social movements is whether or not their needs- eg women's, Green's, welfare recipients' - are relevant to society at large; whether their needs are universal or specific. Theorists divide between those stressing the specificity of movement needs and others their universality - a division at the core of debates about postmodem politics. This: article argues that Touraine's, Melucci's and Laclau & Mouffe's accounts maintain a particularist view alongside a problem atic universalism. By contrast, writers as diverse as Habermas, Doyal & Gough and Townsend provide more coherent accounts of universal and particular needs. These maintain the universality of: real needs, despite their cultural variations; social norms; and notions of human natute, which provide important rational foundations for social policy
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Martin Hewitt (1993) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: