Social Movement Studies最新文献_第6页

IF 3.1 1区社会学

Social Movement Studies Pub Date : 2022-11-29 DOI: 10.1080/14742837.2022.2152787

Márton Gerő

引用次数: 8

Retweet solidarity: transatlantic Twitter connectivity between militant antifascists in the USA and UK 转发团结:美国和英国激进反法西斯主义者之间的跨大西洋Twitter连接

IF 3.1 1区社会学

Social Movement Studies Pub Date : 2022-11-14 DOI: 10.1080/14742837.2022.2142547

S. Merrill, N. Copsey

引用次数: 0

Framing in the Authoritarian Context: Policy Advocacy by Environmental Movement Organisations in China 权威语境下的框架:中国环境运动组织的政策倡导

IF 3.1 1区社会学

Social Movement Studies Pub Date : 2022-11-14 DOI: 10.1080/14742837.2022.2144202

Runya Qiaoan, S. Saxonberg

引用次数: 0

Amplification, evasion, hijacking: algorithms as repertoire for social movements and the struggle for visibility 放大，逃避，劫持:算法作为社会运动和能见度斗争的曲目

IF 3.1 1区社会学

Social Movement Studies Pub Date : 2022-11-11 DOI: 10.1080/14742837.2022.2143345

Emiliano Treré, Tiziano Bonini

引用次数: 2

The compounded2 nature of the Covid pandemic on survivors of sexual violence 新冠疫情对性暴力幸存者的复杂影响

IF 3.1 1区社会学

Social Movement Studies Pub Date : 2022-11-11 DOI: 10.1080/14742837.2022.2134110

Mel Y. Chen

引用次数: 0

Diffusion of intersectionality across contemporary Spanish activism: the case of Las Kellys 当代西班牙行动主义中交叉性的扩散:拉斯·凯利的案例

IF 3.1 1区社会学

Social Movement Studies Pub Date : 2022-11-07 DOI: 10.1080/14742837.2022.2142546

Verna Alcalde-González, Ana Gálvez-Mozo, Alan Valenzuela-Bustos

引用次数: 3

Counter-surveillant organizing during the secessionist cycle of contention in Catalonia 在加泰罗尼亚分裂主义争论周期中的反监视组织

IF 3.1 1区社会学

Social Movement Studies Pub Date : 2022-11-01 DOI: 10.1080/14742837.2022.2142545

Hans Jonas Gunzelmann

引用次数: 0

Re-thinking solidarity movements as infrastructure during the COVID-19 pandemic crisis: insights from Athens 在COVID-19大流行危机期间重新思考团结运动作为基础设施:来自雅典的见解

IF 3.1 1区社会学

Social Movement Studies Pub Date : 2022-10-31 DOI: 10.1080/14742837.2022.2134108

Athina Arampatzi, Hara Kouki, Dimitris Pettas

{"title":"Re-thinking solidarity movements as infrastructure during the COVID-19 pandemic crisis: insights from Athens","authors":"Athina Arampatzi, Hara Kouki, Dimitris Pettas","doi":"10.1080/14742837.2022.2134108","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14742837.2022.2134108","url":null,"abstract":"COVID-19 has provoked what seems to be an unprecedented rupture of life as we knew it. This article draws out key insights into the ways solidarity infrastructures were organized in Athens, Greece, during the general lockdown imposed in the country between March and May 2020. Immediately upon the imposition of the restrictions, people devised ways to provide support to those vulnerable, through a combination of local, decentralized and online solidarity movements. In order to make sense of collective action during a period when collective coexistence was banned, we read solidarity movements through the lens of social reproduction as infrastructure, aiming to unearth the visible and invisible materials, ideas, people and technologies that make up for what sustains social movements more broadly. The article draws on ethnographic research in Athens – including participant observation of solidarity movements, along with 82 questionnaire responses. Our findings suggest that emergent solidarity infrastructures build upon and expand solidarity movements forged during previous crises periods, while further contributing new ways of understanding collective action. Accordingly, solidarity movements of the current period adopted prior and novel forms of organizing, which involved groups and individuals already assuming vulnerable positions, as well as those whose vulnerability emerged during the pandemic. While aligning with health emergency measures, this solidarity infrastructure encompassed care, affect and interdependence and challenged the government’s crisis-management agendas. Eventually, thinking solidarity movements as infrastructure unsettles the divisions often encountered in relevant studies between solidarity and protest. [ FROM AUTHOR]","PeriodicalId":47507,"journal":{"name":"Social Movement Studies","volume":"288 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2022-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80317512","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Profile: Blending old and new repertoires of contention in Myanmar’s anti-coup protests (2021) 简介:缅甸反政变抗议活动中新旧冲突的融合(2021年)

IF 3.1 1区社会学

Social Movement Studies Pub Date : 2022-10-28 DOI: 10.1080/14742837.2022.2140650

R. Egreteau

引用次数: 1

Transgressing taboos: the relational dynamics of claim radicalization in Hong Kong and Thailand 违反禁忌:香港与泰国诉求激进化的关系动态

IF 3.1 1区社会学

Social Movement Studies Pub Date : 2022-10-25 DOI: 10.1080/14742837.2022.2134107

M. Thompson, Edmund W. Cheng

{"title":"Transgressing taboos: the relational dynamics of claim radicalization in Hong Kong and Thailand","authors":"M. Thompson, Edmund W. Cheng","doi":"10.1080/14742837.2022.2134107","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14742837.2022.2134107","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Claims made during mass protests in Hong Kong in 2019 and Thailand in 2020 became increasingly transgressive. Localist demands and calls for the reform of the monarchy, respectively, violated conventional political norms in these two hybrid regimes. This paper examines the dynamics of opposition discursive radicalization during ongoing autocratization. Observational data and protest event analysis are employed to assess the scaling up of claims-making and its relationship to protest size and group solidarity. The paper argues that radicalization can best be understood relationally, between a hybrid regime, on the one hand, and moderates and radicals in the opposition, on the other. It identifies the following three points of convergence that lead to similar protest trajectories in both cases: the marginalization of moderates along with their gatekeeping role of transgressive discourses; the creation of digitally enabled protest networks that facilitated mass mobilization and claims diffusion; and the intensification of protest policing that provoked a departure from reformist to revolutionary claims. The argument offered here shows similarities to but also nuanced differences from the repression literature and casts doubt on the assumptions about the demobilizing impact of autocratization.","PeriodicalId":47507,"journal":{"name":"Social Movement Studies","volume":"44 1","pages":"802 - 821"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2022-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81071371","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2