Is it that the time is over for the old forms of mobilisation. People out in the street shouting slogans etc? Or is it that we are fed up with these types of mobilisations? Or are mobilisations just changing the colour, and the substance still continues?
38 comments:
Mobilisation is the conscious collective action with an ideology. the main motive of mobilisation is to put the ideology or demand in the front of people against which mobilisation started. In the today's context old forms of mobilisation are not happening reason being people dont have time and they think that there are better ways of doing it. Now mobilsation occurs through joining the group on internet, signing the form, mailing, candle light etc. The mass media also help in this type of mobilisation. So the mobilisation are there with different colors.
Times have changed and so has the forms of mobilisation. If we trace back to the 1950-60's national movement was the call of those times. But as time has passed by social interaction has reduced by manifolds. In remote areas people do not have idea regarding mobilisation activities. Moreover the change in the middle class also has a great role to play in the changing colours of mobilisation. Moreover nowadays protest in the form of mobilisation is seen as anti-national so generally majority of the people tend to stay away from it.
Two major reasons for change in nature of mobilizations are disillusionment among the participants with their futility & lack of efficient & dedicated leadership. While the form of mobilization will continue to experience change however it doesn’t imply that older methods would b e relinquished altogether. With evolution of society nature of exhibiting displeasure is bound to evolve too. The society will resort to methods which are considered to have maximum impact in contemporary context. Nevertheless as observed in recent times if the cause is inspiring enough; people do not budge from resorting to older methods.
With the advent of time, mobilisations have also changed their form. People have become more self oriented and the rational thinking of individual gain results in an individual’s participation in the movement. Unless the net gains from participating in the movement do not attract the individual, people hardly devote their time and energy. Also the change in the nature and status of middle class people along with the change in legal procedures with times have resulted in the contrasting ways in which the movements are now being carried out.
The current goings on in Egypt testify to the fact that old forms of mobilisation are still prevalent if the issue is motivating enough. However, in many other places, it has come to been seen as ineffective or even counterproductive. It is also true that other forms of mobilisation have emerged over the years. In this regard, logic suggests that the form of mobilisation that is thought of as the most effective is likely to popular among the masses of that era.
The old forms of mobilisation still hold the potential to serve their purpose. But it is certainly true that the new forms of electronic media and communication have facilitate some new platforms for mobilisation, in addition to this they reinforce the older forms of mobilisation, as News coverage of the demonstrations invariably highlights the role of new communication technologies, especially short message service (SMS) and the internet, in facilitating the protests. Face book, blogs, groups etc. help people at distance to interact.
The form of the social movements depends a lot upon the conditions prevailing in the society in these times. Similarly the sensibilities of people also change with time change which also affects the type of procedures they will resort upon to protest against the establishment. Thus in the recent times where technological changes have altered the means of mass mobilization; the form of social mobilization is bound to change as a counter product. However if the people desire to achieve rapid responses they don’t budge from going with older means too.
The mobilisations are changing the colours but the essence still continues,technological advancements have made mobilisations hi-tech.But, they are less in number, as people are now confined to their own selfes, busy in their own lifes, so until there is a big issue that effects them, they do not gather out in the open.Also,some mobilisations are sometimes seen more of a political stunt
In 1960's and 70's the economic divide between the poor and the middle class was less. In most mass movements and mobilisation the leader belonged to middle class or rich who used to identify with the problems of the poor. However the divide between the middle class and the poor has widened over the years, and left the poor with lack of people who can represent them and take the movement forward.
Mobilisation had been an important source for the social movement but its form had changed in due course of time. This can be attributed to the factors like development of middle class who were responsible for aggregating people and arranging the movement.This lead to the development of middle class with time and poor remained as they were.Second factor was the Hangover of freedom struggle. it was the need of the time for social movement which slowly faded as time passed by.
Time is not over yet and it expresses again and again be it Tunisia, Egypt or Iran. But certainly other forms of mobilisation and protests have evolved with technological advancements. Moreover it lot depends upon how people perceive or associate themselves to the cause. E.g. India's freedom struggle, emergency of 70's and recently Singur.
For effective mobilisation, emotion and identity threat to individual by outside force is triggered by the leaders which may turn vehement eg Gujjar reservation issue or Khap panchayat in honour killings. It all depends on the issue individual identifies to and how leaders channelises it.
In India, Social movements strengthened in 1950-1970 periods. This strength can be attributed to freedom struggle hangover and socialist principles. The leadership of such movements came mainly from middle class people with poor class backing. Today people are trying to maximize their benefits. Fall of Soviet Union and the rise of middle class are considered as reasons for reducing the intensity of movements. Growth has become the primary objective of the world. Now addressing social concern is the priority, not the protests. At the same time rising of violent forms of protests like terrorism, Maoism etc. can also be seen.
There is a disconnect between the different sections of the society, also an individualistic approach seems to growing stronger in the society.
'My voice' matters is no longer felt! Belief that the powerful will finally emerge successful and more stronger has emerged which again dissuades people demanding change through mobilisations.
Also issue based politics seems passe , which was a characteristic of the 60s and 70s.
Egypt ,Tunisia definitely bring in mass agitations to the fore ,interesting to see how the outcomes shape up these societies in times to come.
Mobilisation with people out in the streets is still observed in communist active states like Kerala and West Bengal and also in present Egypt scenario. But the mobilisations have changed its colour with time due to change in middle class and absence of socialist dream. For example, in case of a disciplinary action taken against some fellow participants of an educational institution, then the dissatisfied student community rather than rebelling against the management through strikes etc., prefers to file a signed petition by all the members to the authorities and conveying the same through their leaders only.
Mobilization has changed its form but remained into the lime light with the prime focus on the ideology and the goal to achieve. These days shouting slogans on streets , displaying unity by demonstrating on important areas of the city are replaced by Mobilization on Social networking sites. The Internet has influenced the life style and thinking patterns of individuals. Voting on websites, exit polls are examples of mobilization but without the physical presence of individuals together. The recent upsurge in Egypt is supported by various individuals with the help of e-mails and social networking . The world is flat ..!!
Changes in the society have changed the perceptions and ideologies of people. The process of mobilization has also undergone transformation. This was once considered as a positive step of expression and has now gained the notoriety of creating chaos and instability in the society. This change can be accounted to the creation of middle class where people are satisfied with what they have and are indifferent towards the happenings affecting that section of the society which has no voice of its own to rise. Mobilizations have lost the substance and are dominated by individual interests now.
The forms of mobilization like protest depend upon the causes for which the protest is stirred. If the responsible person for that cause is more or less known and middle class people are affected, then the protest like shouting on street will happen.
The old forms of mobilisation has drastically declined because of individualism creeping in the society. Rising economic disparity and over indulgence in one's work life could be the other factor behind it. However, mobilisations is not finished and has certainly taken other forms such as we witnessed in Jessica Las murder case.
the major reasons for change in nature of Mobilization are now people don't have patiences for a decision to be taken by authority for which they are protesting, so old form of mobilisation are changed with some technology driven facilities like SMS and internet facility which are more suitable in present time, fall of Soviet Union and wider gap between poor and middle calss also serve as a reason for change.
The mobilisations just changing the colour but the substance still continues. E.g. mobilisation of farmers during the replication of Anand pattern milk cooperatives across India during 1970's. Today also the milk producers are ready to bring and accept the changes but with the use of new technologies like ICT, internet etc.
Only change is constant, nothing else. As time changed, people got more involved in their own life and hence left with very less time for other matters, even when these matters affect to some extent their own life. People don’t prefer to protest against matters by giving their precious time, as new generations have started thinking in economic terms i.e by spending time in mobilization activities they will incur more loss then expected gain. Hence people prefer to participate in new forms of mobilizations like use of internet, news paper rather than old methods like street shouting slogans.
Now a days people are busy in their daily life and they seem to be uninterested in participating in activities like shouting slogans etc. The lack of influencial leadership, disillusion, self orientation, changed mind set and technology advancement are some of the main reasons which have transformed the way of mobilisation.Now people prefer to express their opinion through internet via mail, blogs etc.They do not come out in the streets until they find some substantial and intense cause.
With the downfall of USSR socialist ideology and its profounder got a great setback . So we are unable to trace a leader like Jyoti Basu -who led a mob in Kolkata (then calcutta)during seventies and torched buses and trams for a single paisa rise in fair-in modern time. Second important reason for new form of mobilization is emergence of middle class which prefer to utilize legal right and legal ways of confrontation in absence of these rights, mobilization tends back to be violent be it stone pelting in Kashmir or latest jasmine revolution of Egypt
Mobilization is collective action of people in response to something that threatens their existence (could be to a small extent) or to attain something that may increase their probability of existence. The underlying idea will always remain the same although the methods may vary. Today we see that the methods of mobilization are changing. It’s moving from roads to drawing rooms but even today the final impact is made only when people get into the fields.
The nature of mobilisation has transformed but the old form still holds its mettle, which is evident from the current Egypt reforms. The evolved form of media and communication has resulted into new forms of mobilisation where social networking, electronic mails, text services and other features of budding communication technology act as a catalyst to mobilise people. The way of expressing discontent changes with changing form of society. The nature of mobilisation also depends upon the gravity of circumstances.
As we read in tactics, you should make people do what they enjoy.The old forms of mobilisation like slogans and dharnas dont appeal peopme more and hence dont bring the intended change.So leader needs to make sure to first identify what the people are willing to do and then to decide about some innovative method of mobilisation
The mobilisations are changing the colours but the essence still continues. Many new forms of mobilisation have come up with the advent of technology. People now-a-days are more self-centric and are not concerned by others problems.
In my opinion, the slogan shouting etc... may not be people's first choice but have definitely not been forgotten by people. Now there are various means available for such mobilization and pressure tactics, there's media, there are RTIs and PILs and at times they surely have worked on the judiciary and the government, and the old forms are used as the last resort...
Though the world is changing rapidly we still see examples which suggest that mobilization of old forms still persist and hold strong like we saw in the recent Telangana issue. These days with recent technology in hand like media coverage, SMSes, emails, etc mobilization has taken a different face and has the power to reach people in a much quicker way in the remotest of places. With more norms now in place people avoid coming out in public but any type of dissatisfaction which builds up in a society does find its way out.
The effectiveness of mobilisation is important which is not evident in todays context for old forms, as the leaders themselves are not serious in acheiving the ends and want protest as going concern. pseudo leadership killed the faith of peoples in protests as it has taken form of show of strenghth for leaders rather than means to acheive end.
The basic essence of mobilization still remains unchanged. It aims at gathering the maximum number of people for the cause. And with the advent of modern day technologies and lightning fast gadgets, technology driven elements have taken the centre stage. Platforms like Facebook, Orkut etc are being used as a potential launch pad for the faster and effective mobilizations, thanks to its gigantic user base. But when the issue pertains to the large impoverished sections of people, who have been digitally divided, the basic forms of mobilization such as processions, shouting slogans, strikes etc take the driver seat.
It can’t be said that we are fed up with these types of mobilisations. Yes, it is a sure fact that human has got a little “busy” and also now stands away from been sucked into an agitation . But if the leaders who have mobilized the crowd or the idea in itself is so strong that it needs old forms of mobilisation then thou shall happen.
It is true that the old passion and charisma of mobilization does not exist now. There are many reasons which can be attributed to this. One is that people have he mentality that nothing is going to change as long as this political system prevails in the country. So people are almost given up on these things. Another reason is that everyone is so busy and involved in their personal affairs, they have a feeling that there is one group of people who will be there for mobilization and raising voice. So they never come forward.
The world is changing rapidly; people focus more on fulfilling their own desires rather than thinking of all. We have changed into me. During colonial period people struggled together because they were the oppressed. After independence everyone started enjoying freedom. Later it led to focusing more on self and competition to get ahead from others increased. Now old forms of mobilisation have changed as time is critical resource. Many times people think about reason why they should come together to raise their voices if they are not deriving any benefit . Mostly people affected with some issue only come together.
With the advent various ways in which ideas can spread among people, these days the protests come in different hues. The old way of coming on the street and raising slogans still goes on but only when people think that the issue is big enough to merit sacrifice of their energy and time, which costs more than ever before. Otherwise why leave the comforts of your home when you can protest through sms/email? Further, the fact that politics, which has become synonymous with everything negative in this country invariably, gets linked to the protests dampens the enthusiasm of people.
The process of mobilization has been changed but the main idea behind this still remains same.Its like old wine in new bottle.The form of mobilization takes the new shape at the advent of new technology.Leaders try to mobilize through electronic media and through ICT by writing blogs,posting their comments in different social networking websites like twitter, Facebook,etc
The old ways of mobilising people in streets, long peaceful marches might be few and far for the last few decades. But at the same time we have the example of countries like Tunisia and Egypt, where the same old methods have resulted in unprecedented success. Whatever is the face or the colour of mobilisation, the gist of the concept remains the same, i.e. the spirit of humanity, care for each other and the need for change, and these things can never go out of fashion.
Post a Comment