The struggle of the poor is a constant and ongoing discussion in the realm of international development. There are countless studies and literature on how the impoverished became to be in such a situation, and how political and economic systems are keeping people marginalized. There is also equally as many theories on how the impoverished can progress and develop so that their voice is heard in politics, and that their rights are being enforced. One of the contested theories of how the poor can achieve this is by the practice of social movements. Social movements have been a tool used to help influence change throughout history with different levels of success. This paper will argue that social movements are the most practical way for the poor
…show more content…
By sharing similar traits and characteristics, it is typical for the marginalized to bond around this trait which is being exploited so that the injustice can be challenged. Creating a social movement to challenge the system is often the preferred method of social change because they are a non-violent way for change to occur (Domhoff, 2005). Historically the alternative to a social movement was to resort to violence, leading to full scale revolutions and civil wars. In many cases it is no feasible nor desired for violence to be used to create a social change for a marginalized group. So organizing as a large groups promoting a change through civil disobedience and peaceful protests is what contemporary social movements resort too (Domhoff, 2005). Also, contemporary social movements are able make their cause heard by other groups around the globe by the use of the internet and social media. These new technologies have created new tactics for international social movements to occur, and be heard. For being the most realistic, and practical option for a social change to occur social movements are often consider the most hopeful method for the poor to achieve political significance and enforced …show more content…
Social movements differ from NGO’s because they are grassroots collectives that mobilize behind an idea and pursue change (Earle, 2004). They also differ from NGO’s because in their attempt to seek change they have more fluidity in what they are able to do and are not limited to donor organisation’s agendas. (Earle, 2004). Which many NGO’s are. By having more fluidity and less oversight by donors, social movements have the ability to be more radical and reactive, as their goals are in response to local or global politics or norms (Earle, 2004). Lucy Earle argues that there are three main characteristics that separate a social movement from an NGO. Them being: i) the importance of membership- the most marginalised sectors of society which are already mobilised, ii) their radical nature which makes them responsive, reactive, and highly innovative, iii) their perceived authenticity and closeness to the grassroots (Earle, 2004). By having these distinguishing characteristics social movements are generally a more effective method for social change than the tactics implemented by foreign
By sharing similar traits and characteristics, it is typical for the marginalized to bond around this trait which is being exploited so that the injustice can be challenged. Creating a social movement to challenge the system is often the preferred method of social change because they are a non-violent way for change to occur (Domhoff, 2005). Historically the alternative to a social movement was to resort to violence, leading to full scale revolutions and civil wars. In many cases it is no feasible nor desired for violence to be used to create a social change for a marginalized group. So organizing as a large groups promoting a change through civil disobedience and peaceful protests is what contemporary social movements resort too (Domhoff, 2005). Also, contemporary social movements are able make their cause heard by other groups around the globe by the use of the internet and social media. These new technologies have created new tactics for international social movements to occur, and be heard. For being the most realistic, and practical option for a social change to occur social movements are often consider the most hopeful method for the poor to achieve political significance and enforced …show more content…
Social movements differ from NGO’s because they are grassroots collectives that mobilize behind an idea and pursue change (Earle, 2004). They also differ from NGO’s because in their attempt to seek change they have more fluidity in what they are able to do and are not limited to donor organisation’s agendas. (Earle, 2004). Which many NGO’s are. By having more fluidity and less oversight by donors, social movements have the ability to be more radical and reactive, as their goals are in response to local or global politics or norms (Earle, 2004). Lucy Earle argues that there are three main characteristics that separate a social movement from an NGO. Them being: i) the importance of membership- the most marginalised sectors of society which are already mobilised, ii) their radical nature which makes them responsive, reactive, and highly innovative, iii) their perceived authenticity and closeness to the grassroots (Earle, 2004). By having these distinguishing characteristics social movements are generally a more effective method for social change than the tactics implemented by foreign