THE BIOGRAPHICAL CONSEQUENCES OF ACTIVISM

DOUG MCADAMUniversity of Arizona

Using survey data collected in 1983-84 on 212 participants in the 1964Mississippi Freedom Summer project arul 118 individtutls who applied, wereaccepted, but did not take part in the project, the author seeks to assess the short-and long-term political and personal consequences of high-risk activism. Usingboth descriptive and inferential statistics, the author demonstrates a strong effectof participation on the subsequent lives of the volunteers and "no-shows," Thevoltmteers were more politically active throughout the sixties than the no-showsarul remain so today. In addition, the volunteers are much less likely to be marriedand to have significantly lower incomes at present than are the rto-shows. Besidesreporting these basic findings, the author seeks through path analysis to explorethe specific factors and processes that mediate the impact of participation inFreedom Summer on the later lives of the volunteers.

INTRODUCTION

Historically, two principal research questiotishave dominated the sociological study ofsocial movements. The first coticems theorigitis of collective action atid constitutes thelongest and most coherent research traditionin the field (see, e.g., Gurr 1970; McAdam1982; Skocpol 1979; Smelser 1962; Tilly1978). Recently, however, the "micro ques-tion" of recruitment to activism has begun tocommand as much attention as the issue ofmovement emergence. TTie former questionfocuses on psychological, attitudinal, orsocial-structural factors that account for theentrance of the individual into activism (see,e.g., Klandennans 1984; McAdam 1986;Oliver 1984; Snow, Zurcher, and Ekland-Olson 1980).

Although different in emphasis, these twoquestions share a common focus on theearliest stages of collective action. Regretta-bly, scholars have f>aid much less attention tothe later stages of a social movement at both

* I would like to thank Ron Aminzade, GerhardArminger, James Fendrich, Roberto Fernandez,Neil Fligstein, John McCarthy, Susan Olzak,David Snow, and Verta Taylor for their extremelyhelpful comments and suggestions on variousdrafts of this paper. I am very grateful to KellyMoore and Ronnelle Paulsen for tbeir help withvarious analyses repeated in the paper. Theresearch was supported in part by a GuggenheimFellowship, a grant from the National ScienceFoundation (SES-S3099B8), and various farms ofsuRwrt through the University of Arizona's Socialand Behavioral Sciences Research Institute.

the macro- and microlevels of analysis. At themacrolevel we are only beginning to exploresuch topics as movement-countermovementinteraction (see, e.g., McAdam 1983; Zaldand Useem 1987), movement outcomes (see,e.g., Gamson 1975; Snyder and Kelly 1979),and state-movement relations (see, e.g.,Burstein 1985; Gale 1986). At the microlevelwe know a great deal about the factors thatmake for individual activism, but much lessabout how movement participation ebbs andflows over time or the political and personalconsequences of movement participation. Thelatter is the subject of this paper. Usingsurvey data collected in 1983-84 on 212participants in the 1964 Mississippi FreedomSummer project and 118 individuals whoapplied, were accepted, but did not take partin the project ("no-shows"), I assess theshort- and long-term political and personalconsequences of high-risk activism (seeMcAdam 1986). Specifically, I examine theactivist, occupational, and marital histories ofboth groups and seek to determine whateffect, if any, participation in the summerproject had on the subsequent lives of thevolunteers and "no-shows." Before turning tofliese analyses, however, I address thetheoretical issue of the biographical conse-quences of activism.

THE CONSEQUENCES OF ACTIVISM: ACONCEPTUAL OVERVIEW

Although only a few scholars' studies havefocused on the biographical impact of acdv-

744 American Sociological Review, 1989, Vol. 54 (October:744-760)

BIOGRAPHICAL CONSEQUENCES OF ACTIVISM 745

ism, die media have paid considerableattention to the contemporary lives of 60sactivists. Based on coundess newspaper,newsmagazine, and television news stories,many in the general public feel certain they"know" what happened to the 60s activists.And in knowing what happened to the 60sactivists, they presume to know somethingmore general about the consequences ofmovement participation. What they "know"can be gleaned from popular media portraitsof former activists.

What emerges from these stories is theimage of the former activist as opportunisticYuppie, The contemporary lives of formeractivist "stars" such as Jerry Rubin andEldridge Cleaver are routinely offered as"evidence" to support this view, Rubin, nowa stockbroker, and Cleaver, the bom-againclothier, represent reassuring symbols of akind of moral and political maturation claimedto be typical of many 60s "radicals," So oftenhave stories on these two appeared in thepopular press that their lives now serve as ageneral account of the contemporary biogra-phies of yesterday's activists. Thus thecollapse of the Movement in the early 70sallegedly triggered a period of wholesalegenerational sellout that found the lion's shareof former radicals embracing the politics andlifestyles of the "Me Decade,"

Given that Rubin and Cleaver are virtuallythe only former activists that the popular presspublicize, why do these images of genera-tional sellout persist? The answer may lie inthe larger depoliticizing function of theaccount. If most of the 60s radicals grew upto become Yuppies, then their earlier radical-ism can be attributed to inunaturity orfaddishness. By growing up to espousemainstream values and hold conventionaljobs, figures like Rubin and Cleaver reassurethe public that it need not take dieir earlierradical politics seriously. The "kids" werejust sowing a few wild oats before they settieddown. Properly chastened, die 60s radicalsare now finding fulfillment in commodityfutures and gentrified urban housing. Fromthis perspective, the long-term biograpdiicalconsequences of 60s activism ap pear to bemodest.

Despite the popular appeal of the contem-porary media account, there are severalreasons for doubting its generalizability.First, after Rubin and Cleaver, it is hard toidentify any odier prominent 60s activists

who fit the account. Second, the account restson a dubious interpretation of the shiftingp>attems of cultural and political allegiancewithin the baby boom generation. Probablyno more than 2 to 4 percent of the generationtook an active part in any of the movementsof the mid-to-late 60s, It, therefore, seemslikely that today's Yuppies are drawn, notfrom the activist subculture, but from theother 96-98 percent of the generation. Third,the popular account is inconsistent widi diegrowing number of studies of former activistsand the theoretical literature dealing with theprocesses of conversion and alteration.

Conversion, Alternation, andHigh-Risk Activism

Conversion is defined as a radical transforma-tion of a person's life, including theirself-conception, network of associations andlarger worldview. The most common exam-ples of conversion tend to focus on entranceinto cults or insular religious groups (cf,Lofland and Stark 1%5; Richardson andStewart 1978; Seggar and Kunz 1972; Snowand Phillips 1980), These studies clearlyhigh]ight die potentia] for ]ong-tenn biograph-ical effects as a result of the conversionprocess. While some "converts" "lap>se" or"stray from die flock," many others arepermanendy transformed.

Distinct from conversion are forms ofpersonal change that Travisaro (1981) callsalternation. These are identity changes thatare not as drastic as conversions, but"relatively easily accomplished changes oflife , , , which are a part of or grow out ofexisting programs of behavior" (p. 243),Travisaro cites such examples as a highschool student becoming a college studentand a husband becoming a father. The cmcialdifference between conversion and altemationcenters on the degree to which die change iscontinuous with the individual's previous lifeand conception of self. Unlike conversion,altemation does not entail a radical break withthe past or the constmction of an entirely newself, Hiis does not suggest that altemation isan insignificant social pirocess. On thecontrary, it is associated with most of life'skey turning points. While the transition fromhigh school to college student may entail noradical break with the past, it has profoundwd enduring implications for the individual'sfiiture. All aspects of a person's life are

746 AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW

subject to significant change as a result ofbecoming a college student. Moreover, theeffect of these changes is expected to persistthroughout life. Though less dramatic than atme conversion experience, this examplehighlights the powerful and enduring changestfiat accompany altemation.

The relevance of this literature for the studyof individual activism comes from recogniz-ing certain similarities between conversionand altemation and the p)ersonal changes thatoften accompany activism. The degree towhich activism is experienced either asconversion or altemation dep>ends on the leveland forms of activism in which the individualengages. For most movement participants,nothing in their experiences even hints ofconversion or altemation. Quite simply, thefleeting low-cost, low-risk forms of activism(e.g., giving money, writing letters, signingpetitions) in which most individuals engagedo not require ongoing interaction with otheractivists. This requirement and the gradualimmersion into a new subculture set the stagefor either conversion or altemation. Whatdistinguishes conversion from altemation isthe degree to which the group or subculture inquestion is exclusive and organized in oppo-sition to the rest of society. Conversion tendsto occtir in groupw that demand the exclusiveloyalties of its members and maintain ahostile stance toward mainstream society.Altemation generally takes place in thecontext of a gronp that is relatively moreinclusive and tolerant of the other attachmenuof its members.

Virtually all forms of high-risk/cost activ-ism are organized through and thereforeinvolve the individual activist in one of thesetwo types of groups. By necessity, revolution-ary movements tend to create groups that areexclusive, highly insular, and hostile to thesociety they seek to change. Therefore,sometfiing akin to conversion would seem tobe a likely outcome of entrance into andabsorption into such groups. Reform move-ments, on the other hand, tend to spawngroups that are more inclusive and tolerantof mainstream society than revolutiotiaiymovements. Nonetheless, they can be verydemanding of a pwrson's time, energy, andloyalties.' Such groups, then, constitute an

' In her autobiographical account of participa-tioD in a local chapter of the Confess of Racial

ideal setting within which altemation canoccur.

TTius, theoretically, we should expect thatthose involved in high-risk/cost activism willbe very susceptible to either conversion oraltemation and to the long-term behavioraland attitudinal effects that accompany theseprocesses. Empirically, there is even anemerging literature that suggests as much.

Follow-Up Studies of Activists

Though far less developed than the literatureon individual recruitment to activism, theredoes exist a small body of studies on thepersonal consequences of movement partici-pation (see Table 1 for references). Thesestudies are hampwred by a host of methodo-logical problems, which 1 examine later.Nonetheless, they have consistently yieldedresults strongly at odds with the popularaccount reviewed above. Taken together,these studies suggest a powerful and enduringeffect of panicipation on the later lives of theactivists. Unlike Rubin and Cleaver, thesubjects in these studies display markedcontinuity in their values and politics over thepast 10-20 years. Specifically, the formeractivists were found to have:

—continued to espouse leftists political attitudes(Demerath, Marwell, and Aiken 1971, p. 184;Fendrich and Tarleau 1973, p. 250; Marwell,Aiken, and Demerath 1987; Whalen andFlacks 1980, p. 222);

—remained active in contemporary movementsor other forms of political activity' (Fendrichand Krauss 1978; Feodrich and Lovoy 1988;Jennings and Niemi 1981);

—concentrated in the teaching CM- other "helpingprofessions" (Fendrich 1974, p. 116; Maiden-burg and Meyer 1970); and

—continued to define fcemselves as "liberal" or"radical" in political orientation (Fendrichand Tarleau 1973, p. 250).

Taken together, it is hard to reconcile thesefindings with the image of the activists asdepicted in the contempwary media account.However, before we enteace these studies asthe final word on the siftject, it is necessaryto amplify the note of caution touched onearlier. The works cited "earlier are beset by anumber of methodological shoncomings {seeTable 1).

Equality (CORE), Inge Powell Bell (1968) pro-vides a striking example of die potential forabsorption within just sucb a group.

BIOGRAPHICAL CONSEQUENCES OF ACTIVISM

Table 1. Follow-Up Studies of Movement Participants"

747

Investigator(s)

Demerath, Marwell,and Aiken

Feodrich

Fendrich and Lovoy

Jennings and Niemi

Maidenberg and Meyer

Marwell, Aiken, andDemerath

Nassi and Abramowitz

Whalen and Flacks

Year ofParticipation

1%5

1960-1963

1960-1963

1964-1972

1967

1965

1967

1970

Year ofFollow-up

1969

1971

1986

1973

1969

1984

1977

1980

Activistsin Sample (AO

40

28''

23

216

230

145

15/30'

11

ControlGroup?

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

No

No

Before andAfter Data?

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

Yes

No

No

ResultingPublications

Demerathetal. 1971.Fendrich1974, 1977;Fendrich andKrauss 1978;Fendrich andTarleau 1973.Fendrich andLovoy 1988.Jennings andNiemi 1981;Jennings 1987.Maidenberg andMeyer 1970.Marwell etal. 1987.Abramowitz andNassi 1981;Nassi andAbramowitz1979.Whalen andHacks 1980.

" Table was adapted from Table 1 in DeMartini 1983, p. 198.'' Fendrich's 1977 article is based on comparative data on 28 white and 72 black activists.' Nassi and Abramowitz relied on 15 subjects; Abramowtiz and Nassi, on 30.

The first problem concems the timing ofthe studies. Only four of the studies (Fendrichand Lovoy 1988; Marwell et al, 1987; Nassiand Abramowitz 1979; and Whalen andFlacks 1980) were conducted after the closeof what is popularly conceived of as therecent activists era (see Table 1), For theother studies, it is hard to know whether thereported continuities in political thought andaction were an effect of an era in which thefollow-up studies were conducted or anenduring consequence of the subjects' earlieractivism. For instance, Maidenberg andMeyer (1970) reported that a sample offormer Free Speech Movement demonstratorsliving in die Bay Area in 1969 remainedactive in leftist politics. Given the high levelof activism in the Bay Area in diat era, thefinding may be a simple function of time andplace, rather than the impact of the FreeSpeech Movement,

A second timing issue centers on die basicquestion of whether sufficient time hadela{Ked to allow for an adequate assessmentof the impiact of movement participation. Inhalf of die studies, no more than five yearshad passed between activism and follow-upinvestigation. Moreover, only a small number

of subjects are involved in diese studies. Onlythe Jennings and Niemi (1981), Maidenbergand Meyer (1970), and Marwell et al, (1987),studies involved more than 40 subjects,^ Andthe first two of these studies share the timingdeficiencies touched on earlier. Both wereconducted while popular protest was stillwidespread in the United States, no more thanfive years after the subjects' initial activism.

Third, most of the studies draw subjectsfrom only a narrow geographic area, some-times a single city (cf, Whalen and Flacks1980), This makes it difficult to generalizethe results especially when the geographicareas are as atypical as the Bay Area (cf,Maidenberg and Mayer 1970; Nassi andAbramowitz 1979) or Santa Barbara (cf,Whalen and Flacks 1980),

Another weakness of these studies is theirfailure to make use of nonactivist controlgroups. Without such groups, one cannot

Most of James Fetidrich's research has beenbased on data gathered on 28 white activistsinvolved in civil rights activity while students atFlorida State University, In his 1977 article,Fendrich employs comparative data on 100 activ-ists, 72 of them black.

748 AMERICAN SOaOLOGICAL REVIEW

establish a behavioral or attitudinal baselineto judge the effects of activism. Four of theseven studies in Table 1 failed to en^loy acontrol group. Even when control groupswere used, the characteristics on whichactivists and nonactivists were matched oftenleft the issue of consequences unresolved. Forexample, Fendrich matched his subjects onthe basis of college attendance at Florida Statebetween 1960 and 1963. While clearly anadvance over the other studies, even thisresearch design fails to allow for a clearexplication of the impact of activism. What isat issue is the salience of the characteristic onwhich the subjects were matched. Matching isdone to hold constant variables that mightotherwise confound the interpretation ofcausal effects. Fendrich held constant theeffects of time and place but left unexaminedthe infiuence of prior attitudinal differences.It may be that these differences account forboth the activists' involvement in the move-ment as well as the later differences betweenactivists and nonactivists tumed up by thesestudies.

Finally, the earlier studies also lack "be-fore" and "after" data on the activists. Theusual procedure has been to gather contempo-rary information on the fonner activists and tothen infer the effects of participation from thedata collected. But without prior informationon the subject, it is hard to determitie theextent and significance that changes inpanicipation may have bought about.

Correcting all of the deficiencies notedabove yields a pjrescription for a very differenttype of study than has been completed todate. It would be national in scop>e, involve amuch larger sample of activists, employ"before" and "after" on activists and nonac-tivists alike, and be conducted well after theactivists episode in question. The researchreported here generally approximates thisideal.

THE STUDY

This paper reports the results of a follow-upstudy of 330 applicants to the 1964 Missis-sippi Freedom Summer project. That jwojectbrought hundreds of primarily white, aorthemcollege students to Mississi{q>i for all, or partof, the sutnmer of 1964 to help staff beedcmschools, register black voters and dramatizethe continued denial of civil r i^ ts dmnighoDtthe South. As instances of activisin go, fte

summer project was time-consutning, physi-cally demanding, and highly newsworthy.

The project began in early June with thefirst contingent of volunteers arriving inMississippi fresh from a week of training atOxford, Ohio. Within ten days, three projectmembers, Mickey Schwemer, James Chaney,and Andrew Goodman, had been kidnappedand beaten to death by a group of segregation-ists led by Mississippi law enforcementofficers. That event set the tone for thesummer as the remaining volunteers enduredbeatings, bombings, and arrests. Moreover,most did so while sharing the grindingpoverty and unrelieved tension that was thedaily lot of the black families that housedthem.

Prior to their panicipation in the campaign,all pKospective volunteers were asked to fillout detailed applications providing informa-tion on, among other topics, their organiza-tional affiliations, college activities, reasonsfor volunteering, and record of previousarrests. On the basis of these applications(and, on occasion, subsequent interviews),the prospective volunteer was accepted orrejected. Acceptance did not necessarily meanparticipation in the campaign, however. Inadvance of the summer, many of the acceptedapplicants infonned campaign staffers thatthey would DOt be taking part in the summereffort after all. Completed applications for allthree groups—rejects, panicipants, and with-drawals—were copied from the originals,which are now housed in the archives of theMartin Luther King, Jr. Center for the Studyof Nonviolence in Atlanta and the NewMississippi Foundation in Jackson, Missis-sippi.^ In all, 1068 applications were copied,witfi the breakdown as follows: 720 partici-pants, 239 withdrawals, 55 rejections, and 54applicants whose status in the summer projectwas tmclear. The apfdications were thencoded and the data useiit as the basis for anearlier study of recruitment to high-riskactivism (see Me Adam 1986).

The applications wore also used as the

^ My deep appreciatioQ^goes to Louise Cook,the fonner head librarian ^ archivist at the KingCenter, and to Jan Hille^as—herself a FreedomSummer volunteer—of the New Mississ){ i Foun-dation for an their help in locating and copying theappScatioii materials used in this project. Without^eir help, this research would have been impossi-ble.

BIOGRAPHICAL CONSEQUENCES OF ACTIVISM 749

methodological starting point for the presentstudy. Specifically, several application items(alma mater, parents' address, major inschool) functioned as cmcial leads in myefforts to obtain current addresses for as manyof the ap>p]icants as possib]e. The informationon alma mater allowed me to contact alumniassociations for help in tracking the appli-cants. Failing that, phone directories weresearched to ascertain whether their parentswere still living at the addresses listed on theapplications. Their help was then enlisted incontacting the subject. Using the informationon college major as a guide, academicdirectories were scanned for possible matches.Finally, once contacted, the applicants wereoften helpful in locating other subjects.

The result of these efforts yielded currentaddresses for 556 of the 959 participants andwithdrawals for whom I had applications. Ofdiese, 382 (of a total of 720) had beenparticipants in the project, while another 174(of 239) had withdrawn in advance of thesummer. Separate questionnaires were thenprepared and sent to the participants and tothe "no-shows," Particip»ants were questionedabout their experiences during FreedomSummer, their activist histories, and thebroad contours of their lives, personal as wellas political, post-Freedom Summer, Thequestionnaire sent to the no-shows dealt withthese latter two topics as well as the reasonswhy they withdrew from the project. In all,212 (or 56 percent) of the participants and118 (or 68 percent) of the no-shows retumedcompleted questionnaires. In tum, the com-pleted questionnaires yielded the data onwhich the findings reported here are based.

This study closely approximates die idealresearch design described earlier. It involvesa large number of subjects (330) drawn fromall over the country. The research itself wasconducted nearly 20 years after the instanceof activism in question and employs datagathered prior to the summer project as abaseline against which to judge any subse-quent changes in the subjects' lives. Perhaps,most importandy, subjects were drawn notonly from a group of former activists, butfrom the perfect comparison group; otherapp]icants to the satne project. This feature ofthe study al]ows for an unambiguous resolu-tion of the troublesome issue of prior values.The earlier study of recruitment showedcleariy that the no-shows did not differsigirificandy from the participants in the

values they brought to the project (McAdam1986, pp, 72-76), That analysis also indi-cated that "the volunteers and no-showsappear as essentially alike on a list ofvariables; race, social class, type of neighbor-hood (urban, suburban, mral), home region,type of school, and major in school"(McAdam 1988), Holding so many importantvariables constant increases confidence inattributing subsequent differences betweendie no-shows and participants to the effects ofparticipation in the summer project. Thesubjects in both groups looked very similargoing into the project. The key question is, towhat extent do their biographies diverge afterthe summer? To what extent can we speak ofFreedom Summer as having constituted aninstance of altemation in the lives of thevolunteers?

RESULTS

One of the most distinctive aspects of the 60swas the twin emphases on personal liberationand social action. While it remained forradical feminists to give explicit voice to thenotion that "the personal is political," theidea had, in fact, informed New Left politicsalmost from the outset. Accordingly, anyassessment of the consequences of participa-tion in the summer project must focus notonly on the applicants' later political activitiesbut on their personal lives as well.

Political Consequences

The original project applications includedseveral questions that provided infonnationabout prior political activities. Not surpris-ingly, both participants and no-shows appearto have been reasonably active politicallybefore the summer, TTiis was especially tmein regard to the civil rights movement. Fiftypercent of the participants and 40 percent ofthe no-shows were already members of civilrights organizations. Seventy-nine percent ofthe participants and 65 percent of theno-shows reported some form of pnior civilrights involvement on their applications.Similar differences were also found in regardto other forms of political activity. Thus,while both groups were politically activebefore the summer, participants were slighdymore so.

Did this pattem hold following FreedomSummer or did the summer mark a significant

750 AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW

divergence in the political lives of the twogroups? In answering this question, we willwant to distinguish the short- and long-termpolitical consequences of participemts in thesununer project. Short-term refers to thesubject's political involvements between thefall of 1964 and the National Guard shootingsat Kent State University in May of 1970.These dates were selected because they definethe peak years of New Left activism in theUnited States. The long-term consequences ofinvolvement in Freedom Summer refers to thecontemporary political attitudes and activitiesof the panicipants and no-shows.

Short-term political consequences. Theevidence from the follow-up questionnaireswould appear to suppon two conclusions.First, the Freedom Summer volunteers werefar more politically active than the no-showsbetween 1964 and 1970. More importantly,the differences in the activity levels betweenthe two groups app>ear to be directly related tothe participants' involvement in the summerproject. Evidence for the first conclusion issummarized in Table 2.

By a margin of 90 to 74 percent, thevolunteers were significantly more likely tohave remained active in the civil rightsmovement following the summer. Just asimportant, the forms of civil rights activismthe panicipants engaged in tended to be muchmore intensive than those of the no-shows.Thus the ratio of panic ip)ants to no-shows

Table 2. Percent Differences in Political Activism 1964-1970, by Status on the Summer Project(Percents)

Type of ActivismVolunteers No-Shows(n = 212) (n = 118)

Active in tbe civil rights 90** 74movement followingFreedom Summer

"Ver>" active in the 46** 28aDtiwar movement

Returning students wbo report 40* 28being "very"active in thestudent movement

Females who report 66** 45being "very" activein tbe women's movementFull-time paid activist 36* 24

employmentMean number of mender- 3.1** 1.5

ships in potitical organi-zations, 1964-1970"

* Mean rather than percent.* = p < .05.

** = p < .01.

involved in southem voter registration activi-ties was eight to one. Three times as manyparticip)ants as nonparticipants helped orga-nize civil right-related boycotts of northemschools. Twice as many retumed to the Southin connection with later civil rights cam-p>aigns. In contrast, the proportion of no-shows listing "on campus civil rights activi-ties" as their principal form of activism wastriple the comparable figure for panicipants.

With the rise of "black power," the role ofwhites in the movement grew ever moreproblematic. Consequently, the focus ofactivism for the white New Left shifted toother targets. The three movements to benefitmost from this displacement of activistenergies were the student, antiwar, andwomen's liberation movements. Not surpris-ingly, both groups of applicants report highlevels of involvement in aJl three movements.As shown in Table 2, however, the volunteerswere more active in each than were theno-shows.

This characterization holds for one finalcomparison between the two groups. Thefollow-up questionnaire asked all subjects toprovide a detailed employment history sineFreedom Summer. What was surprising wasthe number of subjects who had worked asfull-time paid activists Wi some point duringthe 60s. Thirty-six percent of the volunteersincluded such a job on their questionnaires ascompared to 24 percent of the no-shows.

Altogether, these fitidings suppon twoconclusions. First, the volunteers were signif-icantly more active throu^out the 60s thanwere the no-shows. Second, the gap in theactivity levels of the two groups was motiepronounced than before the summer. Thissuggests that the participants' higher post-summer activity levels were a function oftheir experiences in Mississippi. Fortunately,more systematic data are available to test thisimplicit proposition.

Using information fiom the follow-upquestiotmaire, a measti^ of the applicant'slevel of movement ac&vism between 1964and 1970 was constmcted." The continuous

' The activism scale wa$ coostructed using direequestionnaire items. The fljcst asked respondents toreport the fonns of civil tights activism, if any,they were involved in foSiowing the stumner. Anumeric value was then assigned to each of theseforms of activity based on. its intensity relative to^ others. For example, jmning the staff of one of

BIOGRAPHICAL CONSEQUENCES OF ACTIVISM 751

variable ranges from zero to 59, Notsurprisingly, the volunteers' mean score(21,3) was significandy higher than that ofthe no-shows (13,6),' The real interest here,however, is in identifying those independentvariables that best predict variation in 60sactivism. A simple ordinary least squaresregression was preformed regressing 15independent variables on the dependent vari-able of 60s activism (see Table 3), Theresulting equation produced a multiple r of.64 and an r of ,35,

As shown in Table 3, only five of thevariables in the model were significandyrelated to the dependent variab]e. Three ofthese support the causal importance impliedby the simple bivariate relationships reviewedearlier. However, the single strongest predic-tor of high levels of subsequent activism wasparticipation in the summer project. Whatmakes this finding all the more importantdieoretically is the presence in the model offour variables (age, gender, level of activismprior to the summer, and number of organiza-tion affiliations prior to the summer) whichwere earlier shown to bear a strong relation-ship to participation in the summer project(McAdam 1986, p. 88), However, widi oneexception, the significance of these variablesdisappeared when entered into the presentequation. Clearly, the subjects' later activismcannot be attributed to the same mix ofbackground factors that led to their participa-tion in the summer project. The suggestion isthat the summer served as an instance ofaltemation in the lives of the volunteers andwas largely responsible for the shape of theirsubsequent activist histories.

What was it about Freedom Summer thatencotu-aged the subjects' later movement

the itiajor civil rights organizations was assigned anutneric value of 5, Participating in civil rightsfund-raising was accorded a value of I. Second, allsubjects were asked to indicate their level ofinvolvetnent iti the major inovetnents of the period:the antiwar, student, and women's liberationmovements, among others. Defining oneself as'"very involved" in any of these tnovements wasassigned a point value of 3; "moderately" or"somewhat involved," 2 and 1 point, respectively.Finally, all instances of full-time paid activistemployment were assigned a value of 5, Tbeindividual's activism score was the sum of thepoints on these three items,

' Using a standard F-test, the difference ofmeans is significant at fee ,01 level.

Table 3. Results of Regression Analysis Assessing theEffect of Various Independent Variables onLevel of Activism 1964-1970

Independent variable

Ties to other volunteersin 1966in 1970

Political orientation prior toFreedom Summer

Change in orientation pre- andpo.st-Freedom Summer

Participation in FreedomSummer?

(yes-'no)GenderAgeFamily income prior to Freedom

SummerLevel of activism prior to

Freedom SummerOrganizational affiliations prior

to Freedom Summer (AOYears married during the 60sYears as parent during the 60sYears employed full-time

during the 60sYeais in college during the 60sAttend college post-Freedom

Summer?(yes/no)

Constant

b

.2011.476**

- .935

.534*

5.008**1.787.139

.0002

,213

1.306*- .106- .326**

-1.136**- .708

2.45210.263

SE(fc)

.212

.632

,683

.223

1.8481.885.238

.0003

.136

.575

.403

.606

.440

.448

1.9658.431

N = 189.* p < .05.

** p < .01.

involvements? Two variables in Table 3suggest some answers to this question. One isthe subject's own estimate of the change inhis or her "political stance" pre- andpost-Freedom Sutnmer, Political stance wasmeasured by means of a ten-point scaleranging from " 1 " for radical left to "10" forradical right. Table 3 indicates that a sharpleftward shift in the subject's political orien-tation following Freedom Summer is signifi-cantly related to levels of 60s activism. Thissuggests that participation in the summerproject radicalized the volunteers and encour-aged higher levels of activism,

A second independent variable that bears astrong relationship to the activism measure isthe subject's estimate of the number ofFreedom Summer volunteers he or sheremained in contact with in 1970, The greaterthe number of ties, the higher the leve] ofactivism in the postproject period. Thisfinding adds a stmctura] component to theattitudinal interpretation advanced above.Freedom Sutnmer did more than radicalize

752 AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW

the volunteers. It also put them in contactwith like-minded pwople. Thus the volunteersleft Mississippi not only more attitudinallydisposed toward activism, but embedded in aset of relationships and an emerging activistsubculture ideally suited to reinforce theprocess of pwrsonal change begun in Missis-sippi.

Long-term political consequences: the vol-unteers today. Have the volunteers remainedpolitically active? How do the no-shows andvolunteers compare on various measures ofcontemporary activism? Have the volunteersremained significantly more active or has thegap between the two groups nanowed? Letme take up the first of these questions.

One item on the follow-up questionnaireasked the volunteers whether they were"currently active in any social movements."Nearly half of the volunteers reported theywere, while a quarter said they remained"very active" in at least one cunent socialmovement.

How do the volunteers' current rates ofactivism and political attitudes compare tothose of the no-shows? The data in Table 4show that the volunteers remain significantlymore active and more leftist in politicalorientation than the no-shows.

Table 4. Percent Differences in Rates of ContemporaryActivism and Current Political Attitudes byStatus on the Summer Project

Volunteers No-Shows(n = 212) (n = 118)

Cuirently active in any so-cial movement

"Very" involved in antinu-clear movement

"Very" involved in the nu-clear freeze movement

"Very" involved in the envi-ronmental movement

Mean number of member-ships in political organiza-tions

"Leftist" in current politicalstance*

Agreeing that "tax stmctureshould be modified to re-duce the income disparitybetween the rich and thepoor"

* Tbe designation "leftist" was reserved for thosesubjects who used the numbers 1, 2, or 3 to designatetheir current "political stance" on a 10-point scaleranging from 1 for "radical left" to tO for "radicalright."

* p < .05.**p < .01.

48**

11

10

11*

2.1**

60**

56**

33

6

5

3

1.4

41

40

What are the causal dynamics that mayaccount for the differences between activistsand no-shows. To get at these dynamics, asummary measure of contemporary activismwas constmcted combining three items fromthe follow-up questionnaire.* Comparable tothe summary measure of 60s activism, thecontemporary activism variable is continuousand ranges from zero to 37. The volunteersalso tend to score higher on the variable justas they did on the measure of 60s activism.''The ultimate value of the measure, however,stems from its role as the dependent variablein a path analysis (see Figure 1) designed toshed light on the causal dynamics that shapecontemporary activism. The model consists ofvariables drawn from four time periods. TimeI represents the period immediately precedingFreedom Summer; Time II, the summer itself;Time III, 1964-1970; and Time IV, 1983-1984.

The goal of the analysis is to assess thestrength of the relationships between thevariables at these four points in time. Adetailed analysis of the relationship of thevariables at Time I and pwuticipation inFreedom Summer has been reponed else-where (McAdam 1986, p. 88). Three of thefour Time I variables (gender, # of orgs.presummmer, and level of activism presum-mer) were among the strongest predictors ofpanicipation in that earlier analysis.

The four presummer variables were in-cluded in the model to assess the strength ofassociation between them and level of activ-ism, the principal dependent variable at Timeni. If panicipation in Freedom Summer wasas personally transforming, then the subjects'level of 60s activism should be more a

* The applicants' current level of politicalactivisin was measured by a scale constructed fromtheir responses to three items on the follow-upquestionnaire. First, they received one point foranswering "yes" to a question asking themwhether they were currency involved in any socialmovement. For all those movements they reportedbeing "actively involved in," in response to asecond question, they received three additionalpoints. Finally, if they were currently employedfull-time in an activist capacity, they received fivem<Hie points. The person's score on the contempo-rary activism scale was &e sum of these pointtotals.

^ TTie mean scores on Ae contemporary activismmeasure are 7.4 for the oo-shows and 9.5 for thevolunteers.

BIOGRAPHICAL CONSEQUENCES OF ACTIVISM 753

function of their sunaner status than of theircharacteristics prior to the summer. Specifi-cally, I anticipate a significant direct effect ofpartidpation on the subject's level of 60sactivism, as well as indirect effects mediatedthrough the other Time IU variahles: politicalstance postsummer, # of orgs. 1964-1970,and ties in 1966. I hypothesize that participa-tion in Freedom Summer encouraged later 60sactivism both by radicalizing the volunteers(political stance postsummer) and by increas-ing their integration into political organiza-tions (# of orgs. 1964-1970) and activistnetworks (ties in 1966) that supported theirlatter involvements.

A similar set of dynamics is expected tolink variables at Times III and IV. Inparticular, the level of the subjects' activismduring the 60s is exp)ected to bear a strongdirect relationship to their level of contempo-rary activism. We should also see indirecteffects of level of 60s activism on currentactivism as mediated through the other TimeIV variables. That is, a high level of activismduring the 60s is expected to have laid astrong foimdation for activism today, both bycementing the subject's links to otfier activists(cutTent ties) and movement organizations (#of current orgs.) and by reinforcing a set of

leftist p>olitical values that have persisted intothe present (current political stance).

For the most part, the findings reported inFigure 1 are consistent with these hypotheses.Taken together, they p)rovide strong evidenceof an enduring political impact of participa-tion in tiie Freedom Summer project. Formany volunteers, the project seems to haveinitiated an important process of personalchange and political resocialization and thebeginnings of a kind of activist career. Theimportance of Freedom Summer to this altercareer is reflected in the strength of the pathsleading to level of 60s activism. Whileparticipation in Freedom Summer does notbear a significant direct relationship to levelof 60s activism, it is linked indirectly to thelatter variable by several intervening vari-ables. Participation in the summer project ispositively related to both the number ofpolitical organizations and ties to othervolunteers the subject was involved in duringthe period 1964-1970. In turn, these variableswere significant predictors of the subject'slevel of activism diuing these same years. Inaddition, a strong association exists betweenthe subject's participation in Freedom Sum-mer and his or her political orientation at theclose of the project. That orientation, in tum.

# of orgs.pre-summer'

.190 .187

participatein Summer

Project (}7n)

politicalstance

pre-summer

gender

Rg. 1. Results of Pash Analysis of Long-Term Political Cotisequences of Participation in Freedom Summei'

754

is a strong predictor of the subject's activismbetween 1964 and 1970.

The level of a subject's activism during the60s stands in a similar relationship to currentactivism as participation in the summerproject did to it. Tlie one difference is that thelevel of a subject's activism during the 60sseems to have exerted direct as well as severalindirect effects on level of cunent activism.The direct path between 60s and cunentactivism constitutes the single best predictorof variation in the dependent variable. But inaddition, the two intervening variables, num-ber of cunent organizations and cunentpolitical stance, provide strong indirect linksbetween the two variables. This suggests thatactivism during the 60s is related to presentorganizational affiliations and cunent politi-cal orientation and that, in tum, thesevariables bear a significant relationship tolevel of cunent activism.^

The picture that emerges is one ofpersistent differences in level of activismbetween the volunteers and no-shows. Thesedifferences are evident prior to FreedomSummer (McAdam 1986) and continue toexercise some independent influence over thevolunteers' later activist careers. At the sametime, it is clear that participation in FreedomSummer plays a panicularly decisive role inshaping the applicants' later political valuesand involvements. In addition, these dataconfirm a certain self-perpetuating quality toindividual activism. Activism, by its verynature, broadens the base of the activists'links to movement organizations and otheractivists. In tum, these links make it morelikely that the activist will be drawn intosubsequent activist episodes, thereby deepen-ing his or her commitment to activist valuesand perpetuating the process of piersonalchange that initial forays into activism haveset in motion.

AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW

Table 5. Short-Term Differences in Occupational His-tory by Staus on the Summer Project

* The only remaining variable that is signifi-cantly related to level of current activism is gender,with female applicants more likely to be active. Ihave refrained from discussing this relationship orthe general issue of getider because the topic meritssystematic attention in its own right. 1 am currentlyat work on an empirical paper focusing exclusivelyon "Gender Differences in the Causes andCotisequences of Activism" using the data setemployed in this papct.

Working full-time before age25 (%)

Mean number of full-timejobs held 1964-1970(means)

Mean years of full-time em-ployment 1964-1970(means)

Employed as full-time paidactivists sometime be-tween 1964-1970 (%)

"Strong agreement" withstatement: "My participa-tion in social movenrcntsstrongly affected mychoices about work" (%)

Volunteers

3.9-*

2.2*

33%**

46%**

No-Shows

59%

2.0

3.0

19%

34%

* p < .05.'* p < .01.

Personal Consequences

The ideological imperative of the 60s calledfor activists to recognize the political signifi-cance of their pwrsonal lives and to makechoices about work, family, and relationshipsthat reflected their politics. Any completeaccounting of the impact of panicipation inFreedom Summer, then, must examine theseostensibly nonpolitical aspects of a person'slife.

Short-term personal consequences. In as-sessing the effects of activist panicipation, Iwill again distinguish shon- from long-termconsequences. The period 1964—1970 seemsespecially appropriate for examining short-term differences in work and marital historiesbecause it demarcates the span of years withinwhich most applicants would have beenexpected to begin careers and/or marriages.''Did they fulfill these traditional expectationsand, if not, can we see the imprint ofFreedom Summer on their personal andprofessional lives?

Work histories. Based on the data pre-sented in Table 5, it seems clear that thevolunteers and no-shows were as different intheir work as their activist histories during thelate 60s. The volunteers entered full-timeemployment later, chiuiged jobs more fre-

' The nieati age of the two groups on the eve ofthe summer project was 23.6 years for thevolunteers and 21.8 for the no-shows. By 1970 theaverage volunteer was in his late 20s or early 30swith the no-shows oniy ^ghtly younger.

BIOGRAPHICAL CONSEQUENCES OF ACTIVISM 755

quently, and worked fewer years during thelater 60s than the no-shows. The onlywork-related measure on which the volunteersscored higher than the no-shows is percentengaged in full-time activist employment.This finding suggests that the roots of theoccupational differences between volunteersand no-shows lie in the different pwliticalvalues and comtnitments motivating eachgroup. On the questionnaires, all subjectswere asked to respond to the followingstatement: "My participation in social move-ments affected my choices about work."Nearly half of the volunteers (46 percent)expressed "strong" agreement with the state-ment as compared to 34 percent of those whowithdrew fi-om the project. A chi-square testshows this percentage difference to besignificant at the .05 level.

Marital histories. Between 1964 and 1970the volunteers were just as likely to wed,were married just as long, and got married atalmost the same age as the no-shows.'" But itis possible that the volunteers' criteria forselecting a mate were more often influencedby their politics than was true for theno-shows? On the questionnaires, the appli-cants were asked to express their level ofagreement with the following statement: "Myparticipation in social movements affected mychoice of mate(s)." Nearly two-thirds of thevolunteers but not quite half of the no-showsagreed with the statement. This percentagedifference is statistically significant at the .05level. It must be remembered that thevolunteers averaged nearly 24 years of age atthe beginning of the summer. TTiat meant thatthe majority of them had grown up in the1950s and early 1960s, during one of themore romanticized and conservative eras ofdomestic life in this country's history. Evenas they were challenging much of thissocialization, the volunteers couldn't help butbe affected by it as well. They were no lessinterested in getting married than their peers,but their vision of the ideal mate appears tohave been politicized by their experiences in

The proportion of each group to marrybetween 1964 and 1970 was 59 percent for thevolunteers and 56 percent for the no-shows.During these years, the volunteers averaged 2.3years of maniage, and the no-shows, 2.L Meanage at first marriage was 26.9 for the volunteersa»d 25.9 for the no-shows. None of thesedifferences was statistically significant.

Mississippi. They were now looking for apartner who shared their commitment to thestruggle.

Current occupation/income. One of themost consistent findings from the previousfollow-up studies is the concentration offormer activists in the teaching or other"helping professions" (cf. Fendrich 1974, p.116; Maidenburg and Meyer 1970). Data inTable 6 confirm the applicability of thisoccupational profile to the volunteers. How-ever, the table also shows that, relative to thecomparison group, there are few significantdifferences between the volunteers and no-shows in terms of their distribution into broadoccupational categories, suggesting that par-ticipation in the summer project had littleimpact on the fields in which the volunteershave chosen to work.

However, one work-related difference be-tween the volunteers and no-shows appears tobear the imprint of Freedom Summer. Theno-shows have significantly higher incomesthan the volunteers. The modal incomecategory for the no-shows is $40,000, while itis $20-29,999 for the volunteers. At the otherend of the income scale, nearly 50 percentmore volunteers than no-shows eam under$10,0(X). This disparity would appear toderive from the different political histories ofthe two groups. Perhaps the income gap hasits roots in the volunteer's later entrance intofuU-tinve employment, a difference that previ-ously has been linked to their greaterwillingness to subordinate work to politics.Excluding those who were employed prior toFreedom Summer, the modal years of en-trance into full-time employment was 1969for the no-shows and 1972 for the volunteers.In effect, the volunteers postponed the start oftheir careers, thereby sacrificing the marketadvantage they could have enjoyed as babiesbom during World War II or the earlypostwar years. Had the volunteers entered thework force on schedule in the mid-to-late 60s,they would have benefited not only from aboom economy, but fi'om the relative paucityof competitors for an expanding number ofjobs. Instead, by waiting until the early 70s,they confronted the same stagnant, competi-tive job market as their younger brothers andsisters.

But this remains mere speculation. Whilethe different work histories of the volunteersand no-shows may explain the disparity intheir incomes, it remains for me to link those

756 AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW

Table 6. Volunteers, No-Shows, and Comparison Group' in Selected Occupational Groups (percents)

Selected professional occs.College professorsLawyers or judgesTeachers

(except college)Health practitionersSocial woikersClerigyPhysicians and dentistsNureesPsychologistsEngineersAccountantsWriters, artists.

emertaineis, athletesOther professionals

(including technicians)Executive, Tnanagerial

and administrative occs.Sales occupationsAdminis. support occs..

including clericalService occupatioosFarming, forestry and

fishing occupationsPrecision production.

craft and repair occs.Operators, applicators.

and l^x>rersUnemployed or

not employed

Volunteers%

1787

3222I100

11

10

15

21

10

1

1

12

97

No-ShowsN

(34)(16)(15)

(6)(5)(4)(4)(3)(2)(0)(0)

(22)

(21)

(30)

(4)(2)

(3)(0)

(3)

(3)

(25)

(202)

ComparisonGroup

%

18125

042124007

5

21

34

01

3

1

8

101

N

(18)(12)

(5)

(0)(4)(2)(1)(2)(4)(0)(0)(7)

(5)

(21)

(3)(4)

(0)0)

(3)

(1)

(8)

(101)

%

32

11

01I220322

7

17

97

52

4

8

13

101

(108)(83)

(465)

(4)(40)(29)(91)(64)(13)

(115)(78)

(106)

(316)

(723)

(395'i(283)

(229)(90)

(178)

(320)

(534)

(4264)

' The comparison group is composed of all subjects from the Census Bureau's 1984 Cnrrent Population SurveyAnnual Demographic File who share the same age and general educational level as the volunteers.

different histories to their earlier pattems of pursue "activist careers," In tum, the nega-activism, I attempt to do this in a padi tive relationship between income and currentanalysis which features current income as the activism suggests that die pursuit of such aprincipal dependent variable (see Figure 2), "career" encouraged die subordination ofOf particular interest is die series of padis ^ork to politics, resulting in significantlylinking participation in Freedom Summer to i^^^^ incomes for die volunteers,current income, I expect diat participiation Participation is also linked to lower in-will bear a sd-ong indirect relationship to ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^ mediating effect of theincome as mediated by die subjects later various work variablesl Data fn Table 5 showactivism and work history, . . , . i, ,, a

The results provide sLng support for a *^ ' *^ project veteran, started to work atlink between participation in Freedom Sum- '^8^^ ^ « ' * ' ° * « ' ^ ^ **"™« *^ ^ ' ' "Zmer and current income, SpecificaUy, die ^^""^ etaxiUed in college fewer years after theanalysis documents two dynamics linking project dian were die np-shows. In tum, all oidiese variables. The first centers on the *sse variables were significandy related tofamiliar positive relationships between the * e total number of years die applicants haveactivism variables and die significant negative been employed, Finaj^, the more years therelationship between current activism and subject has worked, ithe higher his or berincome. Participation in the sununer project income, T^se resales,, dien, deffliy coofinnclearly encouraged many of die volunteers to die p>oUtical or activiaixKrts of ttie disparity in

BIOGRAPHICAL CONSEQUENCES OF ACTIVISM

7.659**participatein Summer

Project(y/n)

level of*- 60s activism

.343*

757

level of60s activism

-.045**

familyincome

pre-summer

.165**

# of yearsyears

employed1964-1970

familyincome

pre-summer — ^ x » i.* # of years

years ofcollege

post-summerFig. 2. Results of Path Atialysis of Effect of Parbcipation in Freedom Sununer on Current Income

current income between the volunteers andno-shows.

Current marital status. Earlier I reportedthat the marital histories of the volunteerswere not appreciably different during the late60s from those of the no-shows. Yet, onlyhalf of the project veterans were married as of1984. This compared to 72 percent of theno-shows, and 79 percent of' the matchedcomparison group. What accounts for thisstriking difference? Table 7 reports the resultsof a logistic regression analysis that bears onthis question. The analysis reported in Table 7*as designed to measure the degree ofassociation between 15 independent variablesand the applicants' current martial status (0 =not married; 1 = married). Significantly,participation in Freedom Summer is clearly*e best predictor of the subject's currentniartia] status. Indeed, it overwhelms all theother variables in the model. Without beingable to assess the strengtii of Ae variouscausal paths linking participation to current"lartial status, one cannot know what it wasabout Freedom Summer or tiie biographicalpath it set the volunteers on that has madeh so much less likely to be married. One

speculstte, however. Marriages fail for a

variety of reasons. One of the chief culprits ischange (cf. Houseknecht, Vaughan, andMacke 1974; Scanzoni 1978). Marriages arepartnerships founded on certain assumptionsabout the world and the partners themselves.Should these assumptions be rendered obso-lete, the likely result is a marital crisis Eindquite often divorce. Given the importanceaccorded politics by the volunteers and therapid pace of change within the New Left inthe late 60s and early 70s, it is likely that theirmarriages foundered on the political instabil-ity characteristic of the era.

CONCLUSIONS

It would be hard to imagine a set of findingsthat would contradict the popular image of the60s activists more than the one presentedhere. Unlike the personalities profiled in thepopular press, the summer volunteers haveevidenced a remarkable continuit>' in theirlives over the past 25 years. They havecontinued not only to voice the politicalvalues they espoused during the 60s, but toact on those values as well. They haveremained active in movement politics. More-over, in a variety of ways they appear to have

758 AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW

Table 7. Logit Regression Predicting Qurent MaritalStatus (Married/Unmanied) of the FreedomSummer A|3plicants

Independent variable

GcDderAgePolitical stance prior to Free-

dom SummerChoice of mate(s) affected

by movement involve-ment? (yesJtio)

Cunently employed? (yes/no)

IncomeParticipate in Freedom Sum-

mer? (yes/no)Years of fuil-time employ-

mentCurrent political stanceLevel of current activism# of current politica] affilia-

tions# of years college atten-

dance post-Freedom Sum-mer

Level of activism, 1964-70Family income prior t» Free-

dom SummerScale of current political

attitudesConstant

b

.241- .031- .177

- .114

.033

.130-1.254**

- .032

- .071- .015

.143

.022

- .016-.00001

.042

2.055

SE(b)

.340

.038

.132

.097

.581

.127

.328

.038

.207

.027

.096

.061

.017.00005

.097

1.410

N = 217.*p< .05.

**p< .01.

remained faithful to that New Left imperativeto treat the personal as piolitical. Indeed, boththeir work and marital histories app>ear tohave been shaped, to a ren^rkable degree, bytheir politics.

The findings reponed here confirm theresults of the earlier follow-up studies of the60s activists. What makes the consistency ofthese findings all the more significant is thesize of the sample involved and the span ofyears that have el^sed since the subject'sinitial activism. National in scopie and con-ducted 20 years after the instance of activismin question, this study provides strong andconsistent evidence of the enduring impact ofparticipation m activism.

Theoretically, the results repjorted hereprovide a firm basis for two principalconclusions. Activism, at least of the durationand intensity of Freedom Summer, doesindeed have the potential to trigger a processof altemation that csm affect many aspects ofthe participants' lives. Secondly, the conse-quences of this process may be lifelotig or at

least long-term. The results also shed light onthe specific social processes that appwar toaccount for the transformative potential ofhigh-risk activism. One effect is attitudinal,flie other structural. Attitudinally, high-riskactivism is likely, as a consequence of theevents participants are expx)sed to and theirimmersion into an activist subculture, toresult in a radical resocialization of thoseinvolved. Panicip)ants are likely to emergefrom the experience more committed toactivism than ever before, thus laying theattitudinal foundation for ongoing involve-ment. The significant positive effect of the"political stance" variable on the variousmeasures of subsequent activism attests to thecredibility of this interpretation.

But the effects of high-risk activism are notmerely attitudinal. The activist "careers" ofthe Freedom Summer volunteers also attest tothe mediating effects of certain structuralconsequences of the Sutnmer Project. Thatproject left many of the volunteers tied tonetworks of organizational and personalrelationships that help>ed sustain their activ-ism. Tbe series of positive relationshipslinking organizational or personal ties tosubsequent activism suggests the critical roleof structural embeddedness in sustainingactivist careers.

Futtire research tnight explore in moredetail the mediating effects of attitudinalchange and subcultiu^ integration on sus-tained activism. For now it is enough to alertresearchers to these processes and to docu-ment the role they appear to have played inaccounting for the activist "careers" of manyof the Freedom Summer veterans. For thesevolunteers, the summer marked a watershedin their lives, a point in time around whichtheir biographies can be seen in "before" and"after" terms. The sumaier left them attitudi-nally tnore disposed and structurally moreavailable for subsequent activism. For many.New Left politics became the organizingI»finciple of their lives, personal as well aspolitical. In effect, the summer set them oncourse for a kittd of a^vist career that hascondnued to shapw all aspects of tbeir livesdown to the p)resent. Far from being thefleeting, faddish activi^r often depicted in diepx>pular pjress, activign—at least of thehigh-risk variety—would indeed seem tohighlight the potential-for personal transfor-mation embodied in intense and sustainedsocial action mediated through integration

BIOGRAPHICAL CONSEQUENCES OF ACTIVISM 759

into organizational and personal networks ofindividuals.

EKDUG MCADAM is Associate Professor ofSociology at the University of Arizona. Hisprevious work in the field of social move-ments and political sociology includes anumber of major journal articles as well astwo books: Political Process and the Devel-opment of Black Insurgency (Chicago: Univer-sity of Chicago Press, 1982) and FreedomSummer (New York: Oxford UniversityPress, 1988). The latter has been nominatedfor the Sorokin Award, given every two yearsto the best book published in sociology. Hewas also awarded a Guggenheim Fellowshipin support of this work.

REFERENCES

Abramowilz, Stephen I. and Alberta J. Nassi.1981. "Keeping the Faith: Psychological Corre-late.s of Activism Persistence into MiddleAdulthood." Joumal of Youth and Adolescence10:507-23.

Bell, Inge Powell. 1968. Core and the Strategy ofNon-violence. New York: Random House.

Bennett, James T. and Thomas J. DiLorenzo.1985. Destroying Democracy: How GovemmentFunds Partisan Politics, Washington, DC: CatoInstitute.

Block, Jeanne. 1972. "Generational Discontinuityin the Understanding of Societal Rejection."Joumal of Personality and Social Psychology22:333-45.

Brinton, Crane. 1968. The Anatomy of a Revolu-tion. New York: Norton.

Burstein, Paul. 1985. Discrimination, Jobs andPolitics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

DeMartini, Joseph R. 1983. "Social MovementParticipation: Political Socialization, Genera-tional Consciousness and Lasting Effects."Youth atul Society' 15:195-233.

Demerath, N.J. Ill, Gerald Marwell, and MichaelAiken. 1971. Dynamics of Idealism. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.

Fendrich, James M. 1974. "Activists Ten YearsLater: A Test of Generational Unit Continuity."Joumal of Social Issues 30:95-118.

1977. "Keeping the Faith or Pursuing theGood Life: A Study of the Consequences ofParticipation in the Civil Rights Movement."American Sociological Review 42:144-57.

Fendrich, James Max and Ellis M. Krauss. 1978."Student Activism and Adult Left-Wing Politics:A Causal Model of Political Socialization forBlack, White and Japanese Students of the1960s Generation." Pp. 231-56 in Social

Movements, Conflict and Change, edited byLouis Kriesberg. Greenwich, CT: JAI.

Fendrich, James Max and Kenneth L. Lovoy.1988. "Back to the Future: Adult Politica]Behavior of Former Political Activists." Ameri-can Sociological Review 53:780-84.

Fendrich, James M. and Alison T. Tarleau. 1973."Marching to a Different Drummer: Occupa-tiona] and Political Correlates of Former StudentActivists." Social Forces 52:245-53.

Flacks, Richard. 1967. "The Liberated Generation:An Exploration of the Roots of Student Protest."Journal of Social Issues 23:52-75.

Gale, Richard P. 1986. "Social Movements andthe State: The Environmental Movement, Coun-termovement. and Governmental Agencies."Sociological Perspectives 29.202-40.

Gamson, WiUiam. 1975. The Strategy of SocialProtest. Homewood, IL: Dorsey.

Gurr, Ted. 1970. Why Men Rebel. Princeton, NJ:Princeton University' Press.

Houseknecht, Sharon, Suzanne Vaughan. andAnne S. Macke. 1984. "Marital DisruptionAmong Professional Women: The Timing ofCareer and Family Events." Social Problem.^31:273-84.

Jennings, M. Kent and Richard G. Niemi. 1981.Generations and Politics. Princeton: PrincetonUniversity Press.

1987. "Residues of a Movement: TheAging of the American Protest Generation."American Political Science Review 81:367-82.

Klandermans, Bert. 1984. "Mobilization andParticipation: Social Psychological Expansionsof Resource Mobilization Theor\'." AmericanSociological Review 49:583-600.'

Komhauser, William. 1959. The Politics of MassSociety, Glencoe, IL: Free Press.

Lofland, John and Rodney Stark. 1965. "Becom-ing a World-Saver: A Theory of Conversion to aDeviant Perspective." American SociologicalRei'iew 30:862-74.

Maidenburg, Michael and Philip Meyer. 1970."The Berkeley Rebels Five Years Later: HasAge Mellowed the Pioneer Radicals?" Seven-part series, Detroit Free Pre^ss (February 1-7).

Marwell, Gerald, Michael Aiken, and N.J. Dem-erath. 1987. "The Persistence of PoliticalAttitudes Among 1960s Civil Rights Activists."Public Opinion Quarterly 51:359-75.

McAdam, Doug. 1982. Political Process and theDevelopment of Black Insurgency, 1930-1970.Chicago: University of Chicago E'ress.

1983. "Tactical Innovation and the Paceof Insurgency." American Sociological Review48:735-54.

1986. "Recruitment to High-Risk Activism:The Case of Freedom Summer." AmericanJournal of Sociology 92:64-90.

1988. Freedom Summer. New York:Oxford University Press.

760

McCarthy, John D, and Mayer N, Zald, 1973, TheTrend of Social Movements in America: Profes-sionalization and Resource MobiUzflHcm. Mw-ristown, NJ: General Learning Press,

1977, "Resource Mobilization and SocialMovements: A Partial Theory," American Jour-nal of Sociology 82:1212-41.

Nassi, Alberta J, and Stephen L Abramowitz,1979, "Transition or Transformation? Personaland Political Development of Former BerkeleyFree Speech Movement Activists," Joumal ofYouth and Adolescence 8:21-35,

Oberschall, Anthony, 1973, Social Conflicts andSocial Movements. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Preti-tice-Hall.

Oliver, Patn. 1984, "If You Don't Do It, NobodyWill, Active and Token Contributions to LocalCollective Action," American Sociological Re-view 49:601-10,

Richardson, James T, and Mary Stewart. 1978,"Conversioti Process Models and the JesusMovement," Pp, 24-42 in Conversion Careers,edited by James Richardson, Beverly Hills, CA:Sage.

Rosenthal, Naomi, Meryl Fingnitd, Michele Eth-ier, Roberta Kaiant, and David McDonald,1985, "Social Movemwits and Nefwcak Analysis:A Case Study of Nineteenth C«itury WotneD'sReform in New York State," American Joumalof Sociology 90:1022-55,

Scanzoni, Johti, 1978, Sex Roles, Women's Workand Marital Cortflict, Lexington, MA: Lexing-toti Books,

Seggar, John and Philip Kunz, 1972, "Conversion:Evaluation of a Step-Uke Process for ProblemSolving." Review of Religious Research 13:178-84,

Skocpol, Theda, 1979, States and Social Revolu-tions, New York: Cambridge University Press,

AMERICAN SOaOLOGICAL REVIEW

Smelser, Neil, 1962, Theory of Collective Behav-ior. New Yoik: Free Press,

Snow, David A, and Cynthia L, Phillips, 1980,"The Lofland-Stark Conversion Model: A Criti-cal Reassessment," Social Problems 27:430-47,

SDOW David A,, Louis Zurcher, and SheldonEkland-Olson, 1980, "Social Netwotics andSocial Movements: A Microstnictural Approachto Differential Recmitmetit," American Socio-logical Review 45:787-801,

Stiyder, David and William R, Kelly, 1979,"Strategies for Investigating Violence and So-cial Change: Illustrations from Analyses ofRacial Disorders and Implications for Mobiliza-tion Research," Pp, 212-37 in 7Vie Dynamics ofSocial Movements, edited by Mayer N, Zald andJohn D, McCarthy, Cambridge, MA: Winthrop,

Tilly, Charles, 1978, From Mobilization toRevolution, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley,

Touraine, Alain, 198L The Voice and the Eye: AnAnalysis of Social Movements. New York:Cambridge University Press,

Travisaro, Richard V, 1981, "Altemation andConversioti as CJtialitatively Different Tratisfor-mations," Pp, 237-48 in Social PsychologyThrough Symbolic Interaction, edited by Greg-ory P, Stone and Harvey Fatberman, New York:Wiley,

Whalen, Jack atid Richard Flacks, 1980. "The IskVista 'Bank Burners' Ten Years Later. Notes onthe Fate of Sttident Activists," SociologicalFocus 13:215-36,

Zald, Mayer N. and Bert Useem, 1987, "Move-ment and Countermovement Interaction: Mobili-zation, Tactics and State Involvement," Pp,247-72 in Social Movements in an Organiza-tional Society, edited by Mayer N, ZaJd andJohn D, McCarthy, New Brutiswick, NJ:Transaction Books,