In Malcom Gladwell’s “Small Change: Why the Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted”, Gladwell argues the ambiguity in the relationship between the separation of the structure of an activist group and the strong and weak tie phenomenon. The structure and relationship between individuals of a group both contribute to the category of activism. During social activism, there are two types of people who contribute to social change. There are the motivated people who participate in more risky actions, and there are the less motivated people who use 160 characters or make a few clicks to contribute. For Gladwell, what is critical towards the success of social change is embodied human connection between individuals. This is the foundation for creating the “strong
…show more content…
Gladwell provides an example in the text of a German terrorist group that was capable of becoming successful based upon its structure and the type of relationships the individuals had formed. He states, “In Germany in the nineteen-seventies, they go on, “the far more unified and successful left-wing terrorists tended to organize hierarchically, with professional management and clear divisions of labor. They were concentrated geographically in universities, where they could establish a central leadership, trust, and camaraderie through regular, face-to-face meetings” (Gladwell 178). This example Gladwell provides, establishes the fact that because of the constant in-person meetings between individuals, strong ties had the opportunity to grow into stronger relationships. The formation of these stronger and more complex relationships allowed for a hierarchical structure to be established. Since an appropriate and effective structure was established, this terrorist group could participate in successful high-risk activism. It is the formation of strong ties from outside sources between individuals, that initiates a cascade effect for a desired end result of successful activism. Imagine if a terrorist group was trying to form, but everyone in the group was complete strangers. No central authority could …show more content…
Both structure and relationship go hand in hand because neither can be successful without the other. For example, a hierarchical structure cannot be successful without the combination of many strong tie relationships, and strong tie relationships cannot grow into a group to facilitate change without a hierarchical structured group. Gladwell does remark that both types of relationships between individuals, strong and weak ties, do produce a type of successful activism. A strong tie relationship foundation brings about more prominent activism such as a protest, and a weak tie relationship foundation is beneficial in the spread of information and increasing participation. Ultimately, it is the combination of structure and relationship that, in the end, contributes to effectual forms of
Gladwell provides an example in the text of a German terrorist group that was capable of becoming successful based upon its structure and the type of relationships the individuals had formed. He states, “In Germany in the nineteen-seventies, they go on, “the far more unified and successful left-wing terrorists tended to organize hierarchically, with professional management and clear divisions of labor. They were concentrated geographically in universities, where they could establish a central leadership, trust, and camaraderie through regular, face-to-face meetings” (Gladwell 178). This example Gladwell provides, establishes the fact that because of the constant in-person meetings between individuals, strong ties had the opportunity to grow into stronger relationships. The formation of these stronger and more complex relationships allowed for a hierarchical structure to be established. Since an appropriate and effective structure was established, this terrorist group could participate in successful high-risk activism. It is the formation of strong ties from outside sources between individuals, that initiates a cascade effect for a desired end result of successful activism. Imagine if a terrorist group was trying to form, but everyone in the group was complete strangers. No central authority could …show more content…
Both structure and relationship go hand in hand because neither can be successful without the other. For example, a hierarchical structure cannot be successful without the combination of many strong tie relationships, and strong tie relationships cannot grow into a group to facilitate change without a hierarchical structured group. Gladwell does remark that both types of relationships between individuals, strong and weak ties, do produce a type of successful activism. A strong tie relationship foundation brings about more prominent activism such as a protest, and a weak tie relationship foundation is beneficial in the spread of information and increasing participation. Ultimately, it is the combination of structure and relationship that, in the end, contributes to effectual forms of