This Is an Uprising
Towards the end of This Is an Uprising, Mark and Paul Engler propose that social movement efforts with different methods for organizing can work together in an “ecology of change.” They write, “When mass mobilizations, established organizations, and alternative communities see themselves as complementary, they can create a movement ecosystem that allows diverse approaches to promoting change to flourish.”
Explain what they mean by this?
According to the Engler’s, they try to argue that mobilization of the mass is a tool of the social system that is used to effect change that is desired. There is a need for a healthy social change since there has been a diversity of approaches that are to create social change. Therefore for the success of the robust social movement, there is a need for a corporation of different persons with unique and specific experience in the social change, that is, lawyers and political leaders. It will facilitate the long term organization building, and much priority will be given on the consequence that will occur (Engler et al., 2017). The change is necessary since progress and majority of systems are always not favored by the system; in fact, the system act in favor of the renowned individuals in the society who can afford the laxities in life. Hence, there is a need for the establishment of mass mobilization and to effect the changes in the social environment that don’t favor the majority (Engler et al., 2017). Alternatively, there is a need for an organized and motivated mass mobilization driven by a leader who is goal-oriented to ensure that the mobilization is effective and leads toward a change of flourish in the majority of individuals in the ecosystem. Engler’s statement again tries to evaluate the importance of mass movement in the ecological system and how they change the policy and improve the experience of those the majority of individuals.
What do you think of this idea?
In my opinion, I tend to acknowledge the idea and welcome it to the social environment as it helps keep the government on toes. By this, I tend to mean the voice of the Citizen is listened during mobilizations, and issues tackled accordingly. Social-ecological of change does not only come when selecting the right person or the right person assuming office, but mass mobilization act as a tool towards conveying the democracy of a citizen within an ecological structure and therefore effecting change within and outside the system (Engler et al., 2017). Again the importance of social change helps stop the people in authorities from actions that are geared towards benefit among themselves and no interest to the majority of individuals in the ecosystem. Engler’s idea also helps to attain a common ground for the individuals who live luxuriously, and even the majority of individuals toiling in the social-ecological change by making sure that both needs of them are catered for.
Examples of healthy social movement ecosystems?
The healthy social movement, we mean that the mass mobilization leads to effective change in the ecosystem that was geared toward the majority of the people. Generally, the must be a consensus that took place and measures or laws put in place to ensure the issue addressed is solved (Engler et al., 2017). Some examples of healthy social movement ecosystems that have happened in the history of the United States and problem solves are going to be looked at here. First, is the Global Justice Movement, also known as the “anti-globalization” movement that occurred in Washington, DC, in April 2000, where the protest was against World Trade Organization (Engler et al., 2017). The protesters, in this case, sought clarifications of the use of funds by the International Monetary Funds. Secondly, is the Black Lives Matter (BLM) campaign that campaigned against violence and systemic racism towards black people (Engler et al., 2017).BLM held the protest, arguing that the police were killing blacks without any good reason, and generally, they were protesting for equal rights to be given to both the whites and the dark.
How did distinct groups handle their differences with one another?
Generally, when social movement rises against a particular cult in the social ecology, the resultant is always consensus. In the first case, the world trade organization gave out their audit report to the International Monetary Funds, and the World Bank for verification and the hierarchy of the world trade organization was dissolved, and a new body was formed. The recovery process of the funds that were missing was initiated, and those who were protesting and taken to jail were let loose free (Engler et al., 2017). An agreement was made between the two groups about the use of funds. A law was put in place to show how funds are disbursed in and out of the organization. The law stipulated clearly and transparent ways of spending funds out of the movement. In the second case about black lives matter, the officers who were involved in the racial activities were taken to a criminal court and prosecuted by the due process (Engler et al., 2017). Again clear guideline was stipulated in the police department on the conduct of the police towards service delivery. Police were prohibited from the killing of the culprits of the law unless the culprit had dangerous weapons. Again equal treatment by the police towards the citizens was encouraged. It was a win-win situation for the BLM group since they were provided with the necessary law to protect their rights while the blacks also were asked to obey and follow the rules to the latter.
References
Engler, M., & Engler, P. (2017). This is an uprising: how nonviolent revolt is shaping the twenty-first century. “This Is An Uprising”: A Conversation with Mark Engler. Nation Books. http://www.warscapes.com/conversations/uprising-conversation-mark-engler.