politic social movements.pdf

7/30/2019 politic social movements.pdf

1/12

Studies in the Education of Adults Vol. 43 , No. 2, Autumn 2011 117

Frameworks for understandingthe politics of social movementsJOHN D. HOLSTUniversity ofSt Thomas, M innesota, USA

AbstractThis article has three primary goals centring on a re-examination of the researchframeworks we use for understanding the politics of social movements. First, I detailthe ideological and methodo logical deficiencies ofth e old social movement/new^ socialmovem ent framework. Second, I highlight the positive contribution s of research thatfavoured or in some way promoted one side in the debate over old and new socialmovements. Third, I elaborate what I consider to be the major challenges which newforms of social movement organising pose for adult education research interested inadvancing social justice.

Keywords:Social Movement Learning, Radical Adult Education, Research, Old Social Movements,Social Movements, D ialectics

IntroductionIn September of 2008 th e U.S. Republican Party held its national convention (RNC) inmy Minnesota hom etown of the Twin C ities (Minneapolis/St Paul). Since the conven-tion was to last four days, protests w ere organised thematically for each day. Day oneof the convention was met with an anti-war protes t m arch of several thousand. Havingbeen the latest in a long series of antiwar protests, this march was much like all theothe r antiw^ar protests, as were also th e m ainly ^vhite protesto rs. I walked along themarch route w ith fellow activists, many of w hom were quietly chatting with friendseither in person or on mobile phones as a way to pass the time. The only signs ofreal energy cam e from the smaller contingents of Africans, A rabs, and Veterans w homarched and chanted with a sense of real urgency.


2/12

118 John D. Holstguarded by throngs of militarised police in full riot gear who, unlike the day previ-ous, were in a state of imminent attack along the whole march route. Many of themarchers had set up 'Bushville' encampments as temporary housing around theTwin Cities, which were continuously raided by the police throughout the four-day convention. This was not the same old crowd that I have seen coming out toleftwing pro tests since the early 1980s. At the heart of this protest w as a social sec-tor unfamiliar to many leftists. The marchers had different chants and demands forhousing, food, and healthcare: not as moral imperatives for others in need, but asburning necessities for immediate survival. As the titled implied, this was a marchfor peop le's lives.

The level of energy and the sense of newness of the March for Our Livesreminded me of the massive immigrant rights marches held a few years earlier onMay Day of 2006. For years, the traditional organisations of the left have lamentedthe difficulty in mobilising immigrants. For some, this seemed to be a sector ofsociety whose very precarious conditions as immigrants prevent them from par-ticipation in open protests. Most of the left was caught completely by surprise onMay 1, 2006, wh en millions of mainly Mexican and o ther Latino imm igrants p ou redinto the streets of cities across the United States to deman d socially just trea tme ntand living and working co nditions for themselves and all imm igrant workers. Theyused their own organisations and networks to mobilise their co-workers, families,friends, and neighbours, producing one of the largest one-day coordinated socialprotests in US history and, in one day, they revived May Day as a national day ofprotest in the co untry in whic h it was bo rn; a feat old social movem ents had failedto do since the 1940s.The social sectors mobilised in the immigrant rights and poor people's marcheshave also increasingly taken on the leadership in the organising of the US SocialForums in Atlanta in 2007 and in Detroit in 2010. New^ social subjects are em ergingin the US; social subjects w^ith their own organisational forms and new demands.While these new social subjects are not completely foreign to old and new socialmovements, they are part of the fundamental socio-political economic transfor-mations wh ich have taken place in the last 30 years in the US and aroun d theglobe. While many have been taken by surprise by these new social subjects, oth-ers (Davis, Hirschl and Stack, 1997; Shiva, 2005; Davis, 2007; Moody, 2007; Bieler,Lindberg and Pillay, 2008; Gonzalez and Katz-Fishman, 2010) have understood asAntonio Gramsci (1977) did that the 'masses indicate the precise direction of his-torical developmen t' (p . 173).This new social sector has been identified und er various names. The United Nations(2003) uses the term 'informal sector'. Mike Davis (2007) uses the phrase 'planet ofslums' and says that 'altogether, the global informal working class (overlapping withbut non-identical to the slum population) is about one billion strong, making it the fast-est-growing, and most unprecedented, social class on earth' (p. 178). Bieler, Lindberg,and Pillay (2008) in discussing th e challenges of globalisation for the classic old socialmovement of labour use the term s 'precarious and pauperized w^orking class' and statethat this social sector 'has risen from less than one-quarter to more than one-half of


3/12

Fram eworks for understanding the politics of social move ments 119the precarious proletariat (precariat). According to M unck (2011), the 'social interest(not least to survive) puts' this global precariat 'in opposition to the dom inant orde r'(p . 16). Revolutionary activists in the US refer to this sector as the new class (Peery,1993) or the new poor. Willie Baptist (2010) says of these new poor that they consti-tute the majority of the world's population of 'every age, gender, educational back-ground , eth nic group and colour' (p. 262). He goes on to say that these 3.5 to 4 billionhuman beings living precariously 'are unlike the poor in the past' because they 'liveand die under new conditions shaped by the new information technology' (p. 262).Marxist political economists such as David Harvey (2010) use the term 'dispossessed'to speak of this new sector. Feminists also speak of the dispossessed and the dispro-portionate impact on women of new enc losures of remaining comm ons in the CilobalSouth (Shiva, 2005; Federici, 2011). Latin American scholar/activist Gilberto \^alds(2006) uses the term 'new historical subject' to speak of the new organisational .formsand movem ents emerging in Latin America. These new movem ents according to RalZibechi (2005), 'have been b orn on the 'margins' of established society and have beenled by the poorest....[B]y those 'without'w ithout roof, without land, without work,without rights.. ..These ne w protagonists have displaced the union movement.. ..[and]have also displaced the left' (p. 13).

In adult education literature this new social subject, w^hen mentioned, is oftendiscussed in terms of the informal economy (Mitra, 2005). Madhu Singh (2005) saysthat by 1998, the informal econom y consisted of 500 million people around the world.Shahrzad Mojab (2006), reflecting on the work of Davis (2007) and Donovan Plumb(2005) argues that it is 'in the context of surplus humanity that we must consider thedominant notions of the field of adult education' (p. 352).If we take up Mojab's call and look to the literature on social movements in adulteducation we find a dom inant framework which does not captu re well the politics ofor the socio-political econom ic context for the social movements em erging from this'surplus humanity'. For some time now social movement research in adult educationhas been framed by the distinction made between old and new social movements.This dichotomy is intended, among o ther things, to cap ture w hat are perceived to bethe distinctive political projects of the two types of movem ents: old social movetnetits(OSMs) are considered to advance working-class-based, social democratic or socialistpolitical projects, while new social movements (NSMs) are considered to advancenon-class-based o r cross-class-based political projects orien ted toward identify forma-tion or autonomy. This OSM/NSM framework was developed outside of adult educa-tion scholarship in the 1980s and began to influence research in the field at least asearly as Finger (1989) and Welton's (1993, 1995) work on learning and new socialmovements and Hall's (1993, 1996, 1997) work on adult education and global civilsociety. My work in this area (Hoist, 2002) further solidified this framework as a wayof depicting what I call 'the politics of social movements'. While this framewoi-k hasinformed a significant amount of social movement re search in the field of adult educa-tion (e.g.. Mayo, 2005; Choudry, 2007; Walter, 2007; Sandlin and Walther, 2009), it hasalso been criticised from antiracist feminist (Gouin, 2009) and indigenous (Kapoor,2008) perspectives.


4/12

12 0 John D. Holstqualitative changes in the socio-political economic realities (Davis, 2003; Robinson,2004; Harris, 2008; Smith, 2010) out of which new cutting edge social organising isemerging; the dichotomy, therefore, is increasingly inadequate for framing the poli-tics of social movements in social movem ent resea rch in adult education. New politi-cal projects, dem ands, and organisational stru cture s of social subjects and movementsemerging across the globe such as those described in the latter part of the introduc-tion to this article simply do not fit within the politics of social movements capturedby the OSM/NSM framework.This article has three primary goals centring on a re-examination of the researchframeworks we use for understanding the politics of social movements. First, I willdetail the ideological and methodological deficiencies of the OSM/NSM framework.Second, I will highlight the positive contributions of research that favoured or in someway promoted one side in the debate over old and new social movem ents. Third, I willelaborate on the major challenges which new forms of social movement organisingpose for adult education research interested in advancing social justice.The politics of the old and new in social m ovementtheory and practiceConceptualising the OSM/NSM framework dialectically allows us to see the relation-ship between theory and practice in the politics of social movements. Championingnew^ social movements was a practical/political act and a theoretical stance. In thesame vein, the defence of old social movem ents was a defence of organisational formsand practices and a defence of the theoretical foundations of these forms and prac-tices. We can see this dialectical relationship in the discussions around the newnessof new social movements.This discussion took place within the adult education literature and in the broaderliterature on social movements. In adult education literature this discussion focusedon what was seen to be the more authentically educational nature of new social move-ments. In other words, the 'newness' debate in adult education centred on the claimthat NSMs were inherently m ore educational or transformational because they focusedon pe rsonai and social identity.

On the practical side, there was the objective emergence of movements in the1960s to the 1980s purpor tedly centring on issues of identity. These movem ents tookorganisational forms outside those of the working-class-based organisations of oldsocial movements which developed in the late nineteen th and early twentieth century.Part and parcel of these new^ movements was the development of theoretical frame-works which tried to explain b oth why these m ovements emerged and how they w erenew. These explanations w ere generally framed in a dualistic and oppositional stanceto old social movements. New Social Movement theory, then, was generally opposi-tional to the theoretical unde rpinn ings of old or working-class social movem ents. Theoppositional aspects of NSM theory ranged from an outright hostility to OSM theoryand practicewhat we could call strong NSM theoryto efforts to merely provideexplanations of the broader socio-political transformations for an understanding of


5/12

Fram eworks for understanding the politics of social movemen ts 121on social movement learning (SML), it is essential to see these debates within thebroader and global socio-political economic context of that time period. The inter-related processes of the period most central to these debates were the crisis and dis-solution of most self-proclaimed socialist states, the rise and triumph of the politicaleconomic project of what came to be called neoliberalism, and the rise of postmod-ernist and civil society perspectives inthe social sciences. For NSM theory, the dis-solution of socialist states was a welcome event and a vindication of postmodei'nismand the importance of civil society as the operating terrain of new social movements.Grand theories such as socialism were wrong, dangerous, and outmoded theoreticaloutlooks of the fading period of the modernist twentieth century. The championingof NSMs was then bo th an effort to understand the objective emergence of fundamen-tally new movem ents and a political project to help push OSMs and its accompanyingsocialist theory further into the dustbin of history.

Throughou t the 1980s and 1990s, OSMs were on th e defensive as neoliberal poli-cies devastated w^orking class organisations and movem ents. Theoretically, post:mod-ernism called into question th e very foundations of old social movem ent theo ry and,with weakening organisations and movements, it was hard tojustify at the level oftheory, a practice that seemed to be in m ortal decline. OSM theory shared the fate ofOSMs. Many OSM theorists and activists joined in the celebrations of the fall of self-proclaimed socialist states as a show of their distance from w^hat were consideredundemocratic and ultimately anti-worker policies and p ractices. Yet, beyond celebrat-ing the fall of the Berlin Wall, OSM theory's response to the crisis seemed to consistmainly in a call to organise out of the crisis of OSMs. Most OSM theo rists argued thatneoliberalism, and its objective manifestation as globalisation, was merely a politi-cal strategy of resurgent nation state-based capitalist classes and not the marker offundamental socio-political economic transformations. Therefore, the way forwardin a period of temporary setbacks, was to keep on doing what OSMs had always donebut with doubled efforts. The general retreat of OSM theory and practice was evidentin adult education literature, as NSMs gained prominence in the SML literature andworkplace learning, with some exceptions, became increasingly framed by humanresource development paradigms.History, however, once again showed itself to be the greatest of teachers if oneis willing to listen. Both NSM theory and OSM theory made valid points during thisperiod . Yet, neither side in this deba te seemed capable of actually capturing the fun-damental transformations at play during the period beginning roughly in the ;L960sand con tinuing until today. Nor did either side really cap ture the full range and h istori-cal development of wh at fell under the labels of old and new social movem ents.The limits of the old and new in social movementtheory and practiceThe dualism inherit in the OSM/NSM framework never accurately captured the fullrange and in terconnectedness of the politics of social movements. The following fourlimitations emerged in the debates over OSMs and NSMs and also made the ir way into


6/12

122 John D. Hoistto the early 19th century. The quintessential 1960s peac e or anti-war movements alsohave long histories dating back to or even before the origins of the labour movem ent(Seymour, 2011).Second, the OSM/NSM framework fails to capture the tangled reality of new andold social movements. There are numerous activists who are involved in both oldand new social movem ents at the same time or over the lifespan of their social activ-ism. It is not uncommon, for example, for Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, or Transgender(GLBT) trade un ionists to be active in both their union and organisations dedicated toGLBT rights. Coalition building across movem ents is possible and deemed necessarybecause activists involved across movements see and understand the interconnected-ness of the various issues across movements. The rise of the global justice movem entis frequently referred to as a 'movement of movem ents' made possible by transmove-ment activists. Currently in the US, there are growing state-based movements emerg-ing around budget austerity measures that include attacks on the right of pub lic sectorworkers to organise in unions. It is not lost on m any activists in these battles that theattack on public sector budgets and workers is an attack on workers, women, andAfrican Americans, since the majority of public sector workers are women and thepublic secto r is the num ber one employer of African Am erican m en.

Third, the tangled reality of old and new social movements has a long standinghistory. Moreover, a part of the 'newness' aspect of so-called new social movementsemerging in the 1960s was a loss of the actual ties or historic memory of these tiesbetween old and new social movements. For example, one of the 'new' aspects of thefeminist movement of the 1960s was that it had lost a significant amount of its longstanding interconnectedness with the socialist movement of the late 19th and early20th centuries. Probably the most enduring legacy of this tie is the continued globalcelebration of International W omen's Day; a day first proc laimed by the Socialist Partyin the US in 1909. As Young (2001) indicates, moreover, it was the protest wave initi-ated by the B olsheviks' commem oration of International W omen's Day in 1917 whichculm inated in the trium ph of the Russian revolution later that same year. The loss ofthese ties was embodied in the life and work of Betty Friedan author of the famousmainstream feminist text. The Feminine Mystique. Friedan generally tried to down-play and not discuss her initial activism in and with the socialist movement in the1940s (Coontz, 2011).Historic ties between new and old social movements are not limited to westerncountries. The First Congress of the Peoples of the East held in Baku, Azerbaijan in1920 und er the auspices ofth e Com munist International directly related the nationalistaspirations what in NSM terminology w ould be an identity movementof colonisedcountries with the struggle for socialism. Young (2001) argues that the delegates atthis congress who were primarily from Asia, but also from Europe, and the Americas,forged an analysis that placed the NSM idea of identity politicsnational self-deter-mination as it is concep tualised in the socialist movementas cen tral to the struggleagainst capitalism in the era of imperialism. Moreover, w ith th e presence of 55 womendelegates, the congress pre sented an analysis of the interrelatedness of national, gen-der, and class opp ression.


7/12

Fram eworks for understanding the politics of social movem ents 123how movements may have commonalities around which they can form temporarycoalitions. When we think diaiectically, however, and in terms of internal relations(AUman, 2001), one can see how the existence of oppressor classes and nations isincumbent upon the existence of oppressed classes and nations; one pole of the dia-lectic cannot exist without the other because each is necessary for the existence ofthe other. Further, the overcoming of the situation of the oppressed necessitate:s theelimination of the objective conditions which allow for the existence of the oppres-sor. This was the theoretical perspective which allowed for the analysis of nationaland gender oppression in the declarations made at the Baku conference. It is also aperspective, I will argue below, that is necessary if w e are to overcome the dualismof the OSM/NSM framework for a greater understanding of and a path forwaid forcontemp orary social movement theory and practice.

Moving forward from the old and the new insocial movement theory and researchThus far, I have tried to sho w the limits of the OSM/NSM framework. From h ere , how-ever, I would like to begin to outline what I consider to be necessary theoretical ele-ments we will need in order to move beyond the limits of the OSM/NSM framework.To begin this process, I will highlight the two aspects we should take with us fromthe OSM/NSM framework.Ironically, as much as NSM theory downplayed political economy as pass andlimiting in terms of capturing the fullness of reality, the NSM tenet of a fundamen-tal shift in the late 20th century has proven tobe very accurate, particularly whenconsidered from a political economic standpoint. The basic idea of NSM theory wasthat new movements themselves were considered to be markers of a new form ofpolitics for a new social reality facing humanity and the planet. Coupled with thiswas the idea that globalisation had made the nation-statethe main political targetof OSMsobsolete, thus necessitating and signalling the rise of civil society as theessential terrain of political struggle. This line of analysis was an attack on the veryessence of OSM theory; OSMs organised in the intersection of politics and economics.An essential idea of OSM theory w as that the w^orking class organised in order to usethe state to transform society. Much of the theoretical respon se from an OSM perspec-tive was to insist over and over again that globalisation did not mark a fundamentaltransformation of capitalism or of the po we r of the nation-state. Simply put, noth inghad fundamentally changed in the late 20th century, and therefore, OSMs were asrelevant as ever; they were weaker, for sure, but nothing that redoubled organisingefforts and some tweak ing of tactics couldn 't fix. As the years wore on, however, th eidea that noth ing fundamentally had changed in the last forty years is untenable. Tomove forward, it is essential to accept th e fact that w e are in an era of profound socio-political economic transformation.

While w e need to accept that w e are facing fundamental transformations, W(; alsoneed to accept that we can only fully understand these transformations with the useof political economy. OSM theory was correct in terms of defending the importance


8/12

124 John D. Holstto do the opposite: to show how little social reality has changed in the recent period.This backwards use of political economy has actually delayed and curtailed the use ofthe analytical tools (Marxist political economy) associated with OSMs best capable toexplain the significance and nature of the changing objective conditions.

Social movement learning (SML) research needs to consider the fundamental socio-political economic transformations that have sparked new organisational formationsand dem ands of a new nature. SML research m ust understand that the ne w socialsubjects discussed at the beginning of this article are emerging globally. While tak-ing on locally and regionally specific characteristics, these new social subjects havedemands that are often quite basic, yet objectively revolutionary given the qualitativesocio-political economic transformations out of which they emerge. In other words,when the new social subjects demand access to the basics of life such as water orhousing with no way to access them under the prevailing capital/labour relations,they raise demands that directly confront the existing order. SML research has to con-sider that the new social subjects are forming social movements of a new nature.Paula AUman (2001) juxtaposes uncritical reproductive praxis and critical revolu-tionary prax is. Allman's analysis is relevant here because, for the m ost part, b oth OSMand NSM praxis was of a reproductive nature to th e ex tent, as AUman outlines, it wasa practice generally within the various prevailing relations. The goal of the labourmovement, for example, has generally been to improve the conditions of workerswithin the employee/employer relationship; this form of praxis generally does notchallenge the relation itself as would a critical revolutionary p raxis. At the beginningof this article I cited num erous people w ho have identified these n ew social subjects

under various names. What I am adding to th is line of argumen t, as are others (Peery,1997; Baptist, 2010; Gonzalez and Katz-Fishman, 2010; Munck, 2011; Standing, 2011),is that the new social subjects are objectively outside the prevailing relations, theirmovement for basic demands poses a challenge to the prevailing relations becausethey cannot be resolved within these relations.The immiseration we are witnessing of what Zibechi (2005) calls the 'without' isa structural or permanent state which can no longer be alleviated through reforms(uncritical reproductive praxis), but only through a fundamental or revolutionarytransformation of the prevailing relations. So, not only does SML research need to

consider that these new social subjects are forming movements of a new nature, butthat the nature of these movements is objectively revolutionary. This does not meanthat th e new social subjects are automatically conscious of this fact. The movem entsare objectively revolutionary, but no t inevitably revolutionary; education plays the keyrole here of making the movements subjectively revolutionary. In other words, therole of social movement learning in this context is to make peop le critically consciousof their own practice.Key challenges for social movement learning researchBy way of conclusion I would like to pose what I see as key challenges for SML


9/12

Fram eworks for understanding the politics of social move ments 125new ground in developing conceptua l frameworks for the politics of these new socialsubjects/movem ents. For too long now SML researchers have tailed or cop ied socialscientists when we can contribute to these broader debates and advance our ownwork with our own theoretical work. While we should continue to and strengthenour w ork with social movement researchers in othe r disciplines (Sawchuk, 2011), asa practiced-based field we can draw on our closeness to these new social subjects, sooften involved in adult education programmes, to make our own contributions to atheoretical understand ing of the politics of social movem ents in the era of new socialsubjects/movements.

Second, given the objectively revolutionary demands of these new^ movements, dowe see a qualitatively different pedagogical praxis compared to OSMs and NSMs? Weneed research studies which, informed by a theoretical understanding of the natureof new social subjects/movements, investigate the pedagogical aspects and nature ofthese ne^v movem ents. We now have a num ber of case studies of various social move-men ts which fall under the OSM/NSM paradigm. W ith case studies of emerging newmovements we can begin to develop comparative analyses between the pedagogicalpraxis of the OSMs/NSMs and the movements of new social subjects.Third, how do we understand pedagogically the objectively revolutionary demandsthat are not always understood subjectively as revolutionary? The argument here, asstated above, is that there are new social subjects emerging whose simple demandsfor survival can no longer be m et with in prevailing capitalist relations; the social loca-tion of these subjects makes them revolutionary in an objective sense. Assuming thisis an accurate assessment, pedagogy becomes an essential component of movementsbased on the basic demands of these social subjects. Drawing on Paula Allman (2001),we can say that the demands of these social subjects provide the objective basis for acritical revolutionary practice, but they do not guarantee it. As these social subjectsare increasingly outside the prevailing wage/capital relation, they cannot better them-selves within the relation in an acritical and reproductive way (Allman 2001), althoughpolitical forces may attempt to steer them in this direction. Education based in the real,lived realities of these social subjects is key to making them aware of the revolutionarynature of their objective situation as a part of the development of a critical revolution-ary practice. Many SML researchers and activists do not have a lot of experience withthis type of objective situation. Many OSM activists, for exam ple, are skilled in a peda-gogical practice geared toward extracting reforms from the system in what Allmanwould call an acritical reproductive practice. We need theory and exam ples of criticalrevolutionary practice in the service of the new social subjects/movements.

Fourth, can SML research contribute to a pedagogical prax is that can propel thesubjective understanding of the objectively revolutionary nature of demands emergingout of new movements? In other w ords, we need to pu t our expertise in SML theoryand practice to work to develop new theoretical tools in the struggle to help peoplecritically understand their own lived reality. This was the starting point for the typeof educational programming called for by Freir (2001) in Pedagogy of the Oppressedand developed by others in our own tradition. Today, however, we are confronting anew era of global polarisation between the growing sector of the species described


10/12

12 6 John D . HolstReferencesAllman , P. (2001). Critical Education Against Global Capitalism. W estport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.Baptist, W. (2010) 'A New and Unsettling Force: The Strategic Relevance of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther

King Jr.'s Poor People's Campaign'. Interface, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 262-270. Available online at:http://groups.google.com/group/interface-articles/web/3Baptist.pdf -,,Bieler, A., Lindberg, L, and Pillay, D. (2008) "What Future for the Global Working Class? The Needfor a n ew Historical Subject'. In B ieler, A., Lindberg , I. and Pillay, D. (eds.) Labour and the Chal-lenges of Globalisation. London: Pluto.

Choudry, A. (2007). 'Transnational Activist Coalition Policies and the De/Colonization of Pedagogiesof Mobilization: Learning from Anti-Neoliberal Indigenous Movement Articulations'. Interna-tional Education Vol. 37, No. 1, pp. 97-112.

Coontz, S. (2011). 'Interrogating the Fem inine M ystique'. Against the Current Vol. 151.Davis, J. (2003). 'Speculative Capital in the Global Age'. Race & Class Vol. 44, No. 3, pp . 1-22.Davis, J., Hirsch l, T. and Stack, M. (1997) Cutting Edge: Technolog y, Information, Capitalism and

Social Revolution. London: Verso.Davis, M. (2007). Planet of Slums. London: Verso.Federici, S. (2011) 'Women, Land Struggles, and the R econs truction of the C omm ons'. Working USA,

Vol. 14, No. 1, pp . 41-56 .Finger, M. (1989) 'New Social Movements and their Implications for Adult Education'. Adult Educa-tion Quarterly, Vol. 40, No. 1, pp . 15 -22.Freir, P. (200) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum.Go uin, R. (2009). 'An An tiracist F em inist Analysis for the Study of Lea rning in Social Struggle'. AdultEducation Quarterly, Vol. 59, No. 2, p p. 158-175.Gonzalez, B. and Katz-Fishman, W. (2010). 'New Openings for Movement and Consciousness in the

U.S.'. Interface, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp . 232 -242. Available o nline at: http://interfacejourn al.nuim .ie/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/ll/Interface-2-l-pp232-242-Gonzalez-KatzFishman.pdfGramsci, A. (1977) Selections from Political Writings, 1910-1920. London: Lawrence and Wishart.Hall, B. (1993). 'Learning and Global Civil Society: Electronic Networking in International Non-

Governmental Organisations'. International Journal of Cana dian Adult Educa tion andTraining, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 5-24.Hall, B. (1996). 'Aduit Education and the Political Economy of Global Economic Change. In Wangoola,

P. and Youngm an, F. (eds.) Towa rds a Transforma tive Political Econom y of Adult Educa tion:Theoretical and Practical Challenges. DeKalb, IL: LEPS Press.Hall, B. (1997). 'Adult Learning, Global Civil Society and Polities'. Keynote presentation at the I6th

annual Midwest Research-to-Practice in Adult, Continuing and Community Education confer-ence, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan.Harris, J. (2008 ). The D ialectics of Globa lisation: Eco nom ic and Po litical Con flict in a Transna-tional World. Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Harvey, D. (2010) 'Organising for the Anti-Capitalist Transition'. Interface, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp . 243-261.

Available online at: http://groups.google.com /group/interface-articles/web /3Harve y.pdfHoist, J. D. (2002). Social Mo vemen ts, Civil Society, and R adical Adult Edu cation. Westport, CT:

Bergin & G arvey.Kapoor, D. (2008). 'Globalisation, Dispossession, and Subaltern Social Movement (SSM) Learning

in the South'. In Abdi, A. A. and Kapoor, D. (eds.) Globa l Perspectives on Adult Educa tion.New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Lane, M. (2010) 'Indonesia and the Fall of Suharto: Proletarian Politics in the "Planet of Slums" Era'.WorkingUSA, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 185-200.


11/12

Fram eworks for understanding the poiitics ofsociai move ments 127Mojab, S. (2006) 'Adult Education w ithou t B orders'. In F enwick, T., Nesbit, T. and Spencer, B. (eds.) Con-

texts of Adult Edu cation: C anadian Perspectives. Toronto: Thompson Educational Publishing.Moody, K. (2007) US Labou r in Trouble and Transition. London: Verso.Munck, R. (2011) 'Beyond North and South: Migration, Informalization, and Trade Union Revitaliza-

tion'. WorkingUSA, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 5-18.UN-HABITAT. (2003). The challenge of Slums: Global Report on Human Settlements. London:Earthscan Publications.Peery, N. (1997). 'The Birth of a Modern Proletariat'. In Davis, J, Hirschl, T. A. and Stack, M. (eds.)

Cutting Edge: Technolog y, Information Capitaiism a nd Social Revolution. London: Verso.Peery, N. (2003) Entering an Epoch of Social Revolution. Chicago: Workers Press.Plumb, D. (2005) 'T he Learning City in a Planet of Slums'. Paper Presented at the 24th Annual Con-

ference of the Canadian Association for the Study of Adult Education, London, ON: University ofWestern O ntario.

Robinson, W. 1. (2004). A Theory of Globa l Capitalism: Produ ction, Ciass, and the State in a Tran-snational World. Baltimore: The John Hopk ins University Press.

Sandlin, J.A. and W alther, C. S. (2009). 'Complicated Simplicity: Moral Identity Formation and SocialMovement Learning in th e Voluntary Simplicity M ovement'. Adult Education Quarterly, Vol. 59,No. 4, pp. 298-317.

Sawchuk, P. H. (2011, June) 'Social Movement T heory and Adult Education: A Challenging Partner-ship'. Paper Presented at the Joint Meeting of the Adult Education Research Conference and theCanadian Association for the Study of Adult Education, Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies inEducation.

Seymour, R. (2011). American Insurgents: A Brief History of American Anti-Imperialism. Chicago:Haymarket Books.Shiva, V. 2G05") Earth Dem ocracy: Justice, Sustainability, and Peace. Cambridge, MA: South End

Press.Singh, M. (2005) 'Introduction'. In Singh, M. (ed.) Meeting Basic Learning N eeds in the InformalSector. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.

Smith, M. E. G. (2010) Globa l Capitalism in Crisis: Karl Ma rx and the Decay ofthe Profit System.Halifax: Fenwood Publishing.

Standing, G. (2011) The Precariat. London: B loomsbury.Valds, G. (2006). El Sistema de Dom inacin Mltiple. Hacia un Nuevo Paradigma Emancipa-

torio en Am rica Latina. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Instituto de Filosofa, La Habana,Cuba.

Walter, P. (2007). 'Activist Forest Monks, Adult Learning and Buddhist Environmental Movement inThailand'. International Journal of Lifelong Educa tion, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp. 329-34 5.Welton, M. (1993). 'Social Revolutionary Learning: The New Social Movements as Learning Sites'.Adult Education Quarterly, Vol. 43, No. 3, pp . 152-164.

We lton, M. (1995). 'In Defense of the L ifeworld: A Hab erm asian A ppro ach to Adult Learning '. InW elton, M. (ed.) In Defense ofthe Lifeworld: Critical Perspectives on Adult Learning. Albany,NY: State University of Ne w York Pres s.

Young, R. J. C. (2001). Postcoloniaiism: An Historical Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell.Zibechi, R. (2005). 'Subterran ean Echoes: Resistance and politics "desde el Stano"'. Socialism and

democracy. Vol. 19, No. 3, pp . 13-39.


12/12

Copyright of Studies in the Education of Adults is the property of National Institute of Adult Continuing

Education and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the

copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for

individual use.

Documents

politic social movements.pdf