Post on 15-Jan-2022
Sociology
Name of Paper: Social Movement
Name of Module: Democracy and Social Movements
1
Development Team
Module Detail and its Structure
Subject Name Sociology
Paper Name Social Movement
Module Name/Title Democracy and Social Movements
Module Id SM 07
Pre-requisites Some Knowledge of Democracy and Social Movements
Objectives To introduce the learners to the linkages between liberal democracy and social
movements.
Keywords Democracy, Social Movements, Democratisation, De-Democratisation, Protest
Against Autocracy, Women’s movement, Ethnic Movement, Ethnic Marginalization,
Democratic Social Transformation.
Role in Content
Development
Name Affiliation
Principal Investigator Prof. Sujata Patel Dept. of Sociology,
University of Hyderabad
Paper Coordinator Prof. Biswajit Ghosh
Professor of Sociology, The University of Burdwan,
Burdwan 713104, Email: bghoshbu@gmail.com
Ph. M +91 9002769014
Content Writer Dr. Rabindra Garada
Associate Professor of Sociology, Utkal University,
Bhubaneswar,751004,
Email:rabindragarada@rediffmail.com
Content Reviewer (CR) &
Language Editor (LE)
Prof. Biswajit Ghosh
Professor of Sociology, The University of Burdwan,
Burdwan, 713104
Sociology
Name of Paper: Social Movement
Name of Module: Democracy and Social Movements
2
Contents
1. Objective………...………………………………………………………………...3
2. Introduction……………………………………………..
3. Learning Outcome……………………………….
4. Nature of Liberal Democracy…………………………..
4.1 Features of Liberal Democracy……….
4.2 Limits of Democracy……………………
5. State, Democracy and Social Movement……………………
Self-Check Exercise 1……………………………………………………………..6
6. Social Movement as Democratisation …………………………………….6
7. Social Movement as Protest………………
7.1Protest against Autocracy…………..
7.2 Protest against Marginalization and Inequality………………..
7.3 Protests against Gender Inequality and Marginalization…..
7.4. Protest against Ethnic Marginalization…………………..
8. Democracy and Social Transformation in India……………………
Self-Check Exercise 2……………………………………………………………19
9. Summary…………………………………………………………………………...21
Sociology
Name of Paper: Social Movement
Name of Module: Democracy and Social Movements
3
1. Objective
The objective of this module is to introduce learners to the linkages between liberal democracy
and social movements. It introduces processes like mass politics and mass movement, and the
extent of interdependence between state, social movement, democracy, democratisation and de-
democratisation as explained by social scientists like Charles Tilly. It also reveals the influence
of social movements on democracy. This module also interrogates the democratic
transformation of Indian society.
2. Introduction
Since French revolution the world has been moving toward democratisation. Until now no other
political system proved to be the most desirable alternative to the democratic system of
government. Rather, democracy has become a globally accepted form of government as out of
195 states in the world as much as 125 (64%) states are found to be the electoral democracies at
present (Freedom House 2016; Puddington and Roylance 2016). Since democratisation has
been the welcoming phenomenon for all nation-states, some of them have been in their
transition phases; other are yet to follow and still a few others reject this process altogether.
Countries like China also raise counter narratives against democratic government (Habets
2015). It is argued that democratic regime often become more protective to state than its
citizens, more compatible with globalisation than civilisational diversity and more comfortable
with modernity than traditional morality at present. Democracy also seems to be unfolding its
true character in the form of mass politics and mass movements that challenges the
malfunctioning of government. When the spirit of democracy gets limited to majority rule
(Mahajan 2005), dissents take the shape of social movement.
It is true that attaining social and economic democracy is a difficult endeavour as the citizens do
have different interests with different socio-economic background. Further, each citizen cannot
equally access all of the democratic rights. Consequently, many of them are pushed or pulled
toward forming their collective actions. The push factors establish democracy against
authoritarian regime while the pull factors further help democratising the regime from its earlier
form. Thus, democracy, democratisation and social movements are intimately connected to one
another.
The social movements and democratisation - the most significant political processes have now
been strengthening global democracy in the current century (Tilly 2004). The democratization
process often motivates people to form social movements which further leads toward more
democratization. But not all social movements contribute to democratization; they also lead
toward de-democratization.
3. Learning Outcome
In this module, we would learn about the relationship between state, democracy and social
movement and how and to what extent democracy as a process promotes democratisation. We
would analyse the possibility of collective action and the extent of social transformation as
Sociology
Name of Paper: Social Movement
Name of Module: Democracy and Social Movements
4
brought forward in democratic India. This module enables us to examine the possibility,
desirability and feasibility of social movements for democratisation.
4. Nature of Liberal Democracy
Democracy refers to a direct or indirect form of government that is ruled by the people and not by a
single person or by a few persons or by military force. Hence, it is opposed to the governments of
monarchy, theocracy, oligarchy, anarchy and dictatorship. In all democratic countries, the most key
rights are the right to freedom and equality. However, all democracies cannot ensure such rights
against undemocratic possibilities in their actual operation. It is the liberal democracy which promotes
such rights inalienable and intrinsic to the individuals through its constitutional or statutory
declarations (Doomen 2014). It also seems to play a bridging role between liberal individualism and
democratic collectivism (Schmitt 1985). Besides, it ensures that no majority in power can suppress
these rights. The liberal democracy protects citizens and their civil societies from the state’s arbitrary
action and repression (Diamond 1999).
4.1 Features of Liberal Democracy
Like democracy, the liberal democracy has many features. However, some distinguishable features are
significant for the effective functioning of a democratic government. Thus, to begin with, liberal
democracy guarantees basic human rights and civil liberties equally. The democracy can only ensure
individual liberty when it follows liberalism in true sense - liberalism and democracy reinforce one
another (Plattner 1998).
Second, liberal democracy promotes an electoral democracy ensuring free and fair elections. The
elections are held within a particular time frame or time interval which guarantees universal suffrage
with secret ballot but with open and competitive election. This ensures the will of the people as they
vote or vote out their political leaders in the government. Thus, it promotes equal participation and
adequate representation (Habets 2015).
Third, liberal democracy generates multiparty system, at least two parties are necessary as one in
power welcomes the opposition of another. The strong opposition can question illegitimacy of the
party in power. The multiple political parties not only gain control of the people in power but also
become effective in making coalition government if situation so demands.
Fourth, it must have a constitution that acts like a reference point guiding and supervising democratic
functionaries in all aspects of their functioning. The democratic state must guarantee personal rights,
economic rights, political rights and social rights to its citizens through constitutional provisions (Offe
2011).
Fifth, it believes in separation of powers - the legislative, executive and judiciary known as trias
politic principles (Vile 1989 & 1967). This separation of power not only promotes checks and
balances but also prevents the concentration of power in one exclusive branch.
Sixth, it evolves a government that is accountable to the people for any wrongdoings, and for that
matter it is accountable to the electorate in periodic elections.
Sociology
Name of Paper: Social Movement
Name of Module: Democracy and Social Movements
5
Seventh, the freedom of press and informed public are crucial features of liberal democracy (Herman
and Chomsky 1988). The role of media is significant in the functioning of liberal democracy. Media
has to disseminate free and fair information to the public.
Eighth, liberal democracy also promotes the lobby or pressure groups that work for the specific issues
interest groups. It particularly safeguards the minority interests against majority rule.
4.2 Limits of Democracy
Turning any form of government into democracy is not enough but how it gets transformed into a
participatory and social democracy is important (Huber, Rueschemeyer, and Stephens 1997).
Democracy may be the worst form of governments as was once argued by British Prime Minister Sir
Winston Churchill (Habets 2015). Some major limitations of democracy can be deconstructed in this
regard.
First, liberal democracy may develop either an oligarchic form of government (rule by the few) or
polyarchic form of government (rule by many). Such negative forms may develop due to a lack of
good governance (Freedom House 2015) or decline of constitutional liberalism (Zakaria 1997; Habets
2015). Unlike direct democracy, liberal democracy relies on elected representatives who more often
become unreliable to the people leading to what Robert Michels called ‘a decoration over an
oligarchy’ (James 1995).
Second, liberal democracy often leads to class based-democracy where the rich people control politics
and power. Consequently, the bourgeois democracy perpetuates its vested interests. Vladimir Lenin,
the greatest critique of democracy, therefore commented that liberal democracy is an illusion of
democracy as it tends to maintain bourgeoisie’s dominancy (Chomsky 2016).
Third, liberal democracy cannot avoid the possibility of a biased media and uninformed public. The
distorted information through biased media is the weakest point of liberal democracy. The links
between corporations and media may disrupt the very nature of true democracy. The corporate media,
in the name of liberal democracy, discourages mass views contesting elite views (Herman and
Chomsky 1988; Curran and Seaton 1997).
Fourth, the liberal democracy cannot make voting compulsory. As a result, true mandate for political
position is largely enchased by the vested interests. In most liberal democracy the electoral turnout
declines due to increasing tendencies of cynicism, apathy and powerlessness among the people (Offe
2011). The legitimacy of the electoral system gets further corrupted for which the citizens show their
lack of interest in voting.
Fifth, social conflict is endemic in liberal democracy. Since the liberal democracy ensures cultural
diversities and pluralism, the political representatives coming to power make use of ethnic and
religious loyalties to stay in power. In the process, when some groups become hostile to another
groups, it disrupts the functioning of liberal democracy.
Sixth, it contributes to lethargic bureaucracy. Bureaucratic inertia and ritualism spoil the dynamics of
democracy.
Seventh, the periodic election shortens the public policy. This is because the ruling political party in
order to retain power stress on popular and short term policies. As a consequence, the long term
democratic vision and mission get jeopardised.
Sociology
Name of Paper: Social Movement
Name of Module: Democracy and Social Movements
6
Eighth, the decision-making behaviour becomes more economic than political in liberal democracy.
The real issues of politics get diverted toward narrow economism as the voters are to be pleased with
benefits that may ultimately harm the interest of people at large.
Ninth, the majoritarian tyranny is a usual outcome in liberal democracy (Deneen 2015). The minority
then becomes vulnerable to the majority rule. In the name of majority, the representative government
favours the elite groups who perpetuate their personal interests by depriving the masses.
Tenth, the liberal democracy often fails to stop corruption and misappropriation of public funds
caused by irresponsible elected representatives as it is quite observable in the developing country like
India.
Finally, it often deviates from the free and fair election (Habets 2015; Huntington 1991). The
excessive use or abuse of politics disrupts the actual formation of political structure in liberal
democracy. The unscrupulous politicians resort to immoral practices - use of money and muscle
power in contesting and wining election.
5. State, Democracy and Social Movement: Mass Politics and Mass Movement
There has been changing relationship between state, democracy and social movements in the nation-
states over the centuries. The formation of state from its early Greek state to modern state has been
possible due to the changing intervention of democracy in the history. But such changes could become
possible only due to the emergence of mass politics, and mass movement in the nation-states. The
states and democracy are mutually supportive and disruptive of each other. Due to rapid spread of
democratic rights, the state has become the target of collective action now (Tarrow 1994). The state
and its policies and programs also encourage, discourage, shape and transform the process of social
movements. Thus, the old variety of western and eastern states has been replaced by the modern states
at present.
However, from Hobbesian contractual state to Weberian bureaucratic state, the conceptualisation of
democracy has been controversial in the world. The social movements have been leading democratic
state toward democratisation. However, it depends upon the democratic extent of a political regime
and the degree of interrelationships among the state and social movement that has been ensuing over
the time. Any political regime - democratic or undemocratic - reflects a set of political relationship
between its government and citizens. The dynamics of such relationship reflect upon the action and
reactions among its state and citizens over the time. However, the citizens’ collective contention can
radically disrupt their relationship. The undemocratic regimes witness the civil wars, whereas the
democratic regimes tolerate social movements (Tilly 2007).
Tilly (2007) has categorized the democratic and undemocratic regimes into four major types such as
high-capacity undemocratic, low-capacity undemocratic, high-capacity democratic and low-capacity
democratic. As per his understanding, the public politics and voices usually get restricted and coerced
by the security forces in the high-capacity undemocratic state. This high undemocratic repressive
government is subjected to change either by the political struggle from the top or by the mass rebellion
from the bottom. Nevertheless, the multiple political actors like warlords and ethnic blocs, the
multiple mobilisations like religious or ethnic movements and the violent struggle like civil wars, etc,
occur in the low-capacity undemocratic state. It is assumed that the contentious politics restricted to
revolution in the former category may result into multiple types of collective actions in the latter
category.
Sociology
Name of Paper: Social Movement
Name of Module: Democracy and Social Movements
7
The high-capacity democratic state facilitates the frequent collective actions - political party
mobilizations, interest group activity, formation of social movements, etc. It also becomes more
effective in monitoring the public politics and political violence. On the contrary, the low-capacity
democratic state become less effective and facilitates high violence in public politics. Thus, the
dynamics of collective action depend upon the high or low level capacity of both democratic and
undemocratic states.
The mafia, criminal gangs, civil armed forces, external political forces, hostile religious movements,
regional separatist mobilisations, autonomous ethnic mobilisations, corruption networks and so on
spoil the democratic capacity of a state (Offe 2011). The leading consequences have been the mass
politics and mass movements. Mass politics is the mass oriented political activity that generally occurs
in a state beyond its institutionalised political settings. It occurs when a large number of people engage
with political activities - seem to be spontaneous, unplanned, undemocratic and controversial in
changing and challenging the established political regime of a nation-state. The extent of mass politics
however depends on the dynamics of mass political parties.
The mass politics gives rise to mass movements as for instance, the way Industrial revolution occurred
in the Western world. The strength and stability of a democratic state depend on its legitimacy and
effectiveness (Offe 2011; Lipset 1981). The mass politics ensure a political platform to the minority
and marginalized sections – the underrepresented people to gain legitimacy and effectiveness of
democratic regimes. It can challenge the democratic inertia and constitutional ritualism developed in
the democracy. Therefore, the civil rights movements, environment movements, anti-nuclear
movements, anti-war movements, etc., get prompted by mass politics and mass movements in the
nation-states. It paves the way to achieve a mature democracy of better government and better
citizens. The strategy of mass politics and mass movements is also used by political parties, trade
union leaders, political activists, NGOs, pressure groups and the like.
It is however argued that direct collective actions – the mass movements - usually hamper the smooth
functioning of political institutions because the people in power then take policy decisions in haste
without going through the merits of real political issues. Such populist politics is, therefore,
considered anti-democratic in nature.
Self – Check Exercise – 1
Q 1. How are state, democracy and social movement related to each other?
The relationship among state, democracy and social movements is increasingly visible in the world.
The formation of state from its early Greek state to modern state has been possible due to the changing
intervention of democracy in the world. The democratic state facilitates greater political participation,
political discussion, free assembly, political factions, etc, thereby contributing to the formation of
political movements. The state and its policies and programmes also shape, reshape, encourage,
discourage and transform the process of social movements. The collective action in forms of mass
politics, mass movement and social movements normally leads the states toward democratisation.
According to Tilly, the undemocratic regimes witness the civil wars whereas the democratic regimes
tolerate social movements.
Q 2. How has Tilly classified political regimes?
Sociology
Name of Paper: Social Movement
Name of Module: Democracy and Social Movements
8
Charles Tilly has categorized the democratic and undemocratic regimes into four major types such as
high-capacity undemocratic, low-capacity undemocratic, high-capacity democratic and low-capacity
democratic.
6. Social Movement as Democratisation
Charles Tilly (2007) claims that the prospect of a democracy lies in its degree of democratization and
collective mobilization. To him, the essential elements of democracy include a state and its citizens-
the former controls the legitimate use of violence within a territory while the latter usually comes
under state’s control and protection. The democracy promotes certain relations between state and its
citizens (with rights and duties), but its democratic degree depends on the extent the former conforms
to the latter’s demands. Further, a regime becoming democratic depends on whether the political
relations between the state and its citizens would be broad, equal, protected, or mutually binding.
The relationship between a state and its citizens gives rise to two changing processes -
democratization and de-democratization. While the process democratization refers to a movement
towards broader, more equal, more protected and more consultative relations, the de-democratization
process refers to its opposite (Tilly 2007). To him the democracy must include the processes of
integration of interpersonal trust networks into politics, insulation of politics from economic and
social inequalities and elimination or neutralization of the coercive powers - state, military elites,
warlords, clans, etc.
Tilly traces the instances of social movements first in the West after 1750 and thereafter these
movements have spread to the world through colonialism, trade and migration (Tilly 2004 &2007). He
also explored social movement as a process of change, collective action and contentious politics. As a
process, the social movement tends to have its own life cycle as it has its own reason to emerge and
grow as well as to decline in due course of time. Both Blumer (1969) and Tilly (1978) have identified
social movements with a four-stage process - preliminary stage, coalescence stage, institutionalization
stage and decline stage. In the first stage, the social movement emerges with the public issues and
discontentment, in the second stage the public issues and discontentment get publicized, in the third
stage social movement moves toward its bureaucratization, and in the final stage public issues are not
taken seriously either due to success or failure of social movement.
Tilly has also identified social movements with three dynamic elements - a campaign, social
movement repertoire and WUNC (worthiness, unity, numbers and commitments) by which the
ordinary people can participate in the public politics (Tilly 2004 & 2007). By ‘campaign’ he means an
organized public effort that makes collective claims on targeted authorities. It refers to a public
campaign by a group of claimants on some objects of claims. The ‘social-movement repertoire’ refers
to combined forms of political action such as public meetings, solemn processions, vigils, rallies,
demonstrations, pamphleteering, petition drives, associations and coalitions. Finally, the WUNC
displays participants' concerted public representation. These context-specific dynamic elements
clearly relate social movement with the process of democratisation and nation building.
6.1 Democratisation or De-democratization
It is true that social movement contributing to democratisation breaks loose the autocratic rule. Its
reverse process may also equally happen - de-democratization. For instance, after the World War I
Weimar Republic introduced a measure of democratization in Germany, whereas Hitler's seizure of
power in 1933 was an example of de-democratization (Tilly 2007). All social movements in the
process of grappling with a given situation either establish democracy or change the democracy in
Sociology
Name of Paper: Social Movement
Name of Module: Democracy and Social Movements
9
different ways. The polity model and mobilisation model explained by Tilly substantiate this
dynamics differently.
The polity model is a system-level model by which its components, i.e., government, polity, coalitions
and contenders help changing the government. According to Tilly, the French revolution is an
example of this. But the mobilisation model explains the extent of collective action along with the
variables like political interests, organisation, mobilisation, collective action, and opportunity. Tilly
and Tarrow (2007) have further developed political opportunity structure (POS) with combined
variables like open and close polity, presence and absence of allies and supporters, the divided elites,
etc., at the macro-level. They also explain the variation of contentious politics from area to area and
time to time.
Democratisation as a democratic process of change breaks loose the authoritarian or autocratic rule.
However, the extent of democratisation is often determined by the nature of political structures and
elite political action. This is also true that no political elites or autocratic authority so motto go for
democratisation unless the collective action compel them to do so (Tilly 2007). But the
democratisation can be activated through both top down mobilization and bottom up mobilization.
This leads to two important approaches to democratization - populist approach and elitist approach. As
per the former approach, democratization takes place as a bottom up process, whereas it is top-down
process in the latter case. The social movements from below promote democracy by creating public
space and transfer of power. On the contrary, the top-down process of democratisation may lead to
new forms of authoritarianism. For instance, the labour movements in the 1970s immensely
contributed in the making of welfare states in the West, but in twentieth century the neoliberal turn of
the West questioned the welfare states and forced the government to stop providing such welfare.
The other processes like modernization, urbanisation or any other social change also promote both
democratization and social movements because they help in increasing social networks, equalizing
access to resources, insulating public politics from existing inequalities or proliferating trust networks
(Tilly 2004 & 2007).
7. Social Movement as Protest against autocracy/inequality/marginalisation
Though social inequality of one or other type is omnipresent in all societies, only a few of these
societies can promote social movements against social inequalities. And it is the democratic form of
government that often encourages social movements as compared to other forms of government. The
movements against undemocratic patterns of inequalities - gender, race or ethnicity seem to be more
mobilised in the Western democratic countries than in non-democratic countries like China and
Russia. Scholars like Tilly (1986), Della Porta and Tarrow (2004) and Tarrow (2005) have also
analysed the undemocratic political regimes - their weakness, institutions and social structures in
general.
7.1 Movements against Autocracy
Any autocratic form of government becomes despotic, tyrannical and dictatorial in nature (Celestino
2011). It is also true that protest movements whether mass-driven or elite inspired or both have been
challenging the autocratic governments all over the world. However, the nature and result of citizens’
protest movement against autocratic governments is region specific and elite or mass specific. For
instance, the protests against any autocratic rule organised by the elites in Latin America and southern
Europe (O’Donnell and Schmitter 1986; Przeworski 1991) are qualitatively different from the protest
movements organised from below - the masses in African, Asian, and post-Communist countries
Sociology
Name of Paper: Social Movement
Name of Module: Democracy and Social Movements
10
(Collier 1999). Some unusual protests also occur in the countries where collective action in any form
seems to be under stiff autocratic control. In the countries like Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and
Palestine, the citizens are fighting for their democratic rights whereas the movements against
autocratic rule in some other countries belonging to Arab league are becoming slow and even not
being grounded with local citizens.
The host of Arab revolts - civil disobedience, civil resistance, silent protests, sit-ins, protest camps,
self-immolation, social media, internet activism, defection, demonstrations, revolution, riots, urban
warfare, uprising, insurgency emerged in-between 2010 and 2011 is popularly known as “Arab
Spring" (Ashley 2011) and “Arab awakening” (Aljazeera 2011). Consequently, since 2010 a series of
protests and demonstrations against autocratic governments occurred in Arab has been causing a
network of diffusion in the Arab-majority states of North Africa and Middle East (Zhukov and Stewart
2013).
However, unlike the political protests, mass politics, mass movements and social movements that take
place in the democratic world the people’s protests against autocratic governments in the Arab world
reveal a unique picture. These protest movements are organised against the imported democracy-
usually perceived as European strategy of democratising the Arabian world. Despite the counter
movements like revitalising the Islamic regime in Arab, many protest movements in Egypt, Syria,
Oman, Yemen and Morocco were also found successful against the autocratic governments. For
instance, the people’s protests could overthrow the autocratic governments once perpetuated by Zine
El Abidine Ben Ali in Tunisia, Hosni Mubarak in Egypt, Muammar Gaddafi in Libya and Ali
Abdullah Saleh in Yemen (Ruthven, 2016; Lynch 2012; Massad 2012).
Similarly many African, European and Asian countries have been confronting the challenges of
people’s protest movements due to diffusion impact of Arab springs. Burma (under military rule from
1962 to 2010) could bring many political and economic reforms during 2011–2015 due to a prolonged
democratic movement led by Aung San Suu Kyi and her party National League for Democracy. The
democratic revolution through Facebook campaign also reached Egypt and Myanmar in 2011 (Shah
2011).
7.2 Movement against Marginalisation and Inequality
There is dearth of study on possibility and feasibility of social movements against marginalisation in
the world. It is also true that the agency and politics of marginalised groups are hardly recognised and
often suppressed or undermined by the dominant groups. It is normally perceived that the subalterns
cannot mobilise themselves for collective action. In the developing country like India the social
movements against marginalisation and inequalities are usually perceived as law and order problems.
The “authentic essence and liberating presence of the subaltern groups” even in the academic
discipline like sociology was largely missing in India (Garada, 2013). Indeed it has been a critical
heart searching for dalit, tribal and gender in Indian sociology (ibid). Now the subaltern consciousness
though has gained momentum but grapple with stiff mainstream oppositions in India. It is true that the
marginalised and socially excluded groups lack strategy, resources and support to mobilise collective
actions. However, their physical and cultural traits being stigmatised by the society and disapproved
by the dominant groups destine them to be discriminated in accessing the resources required for
survival in the society. As a result, they suffer from genocide, ethnocide, ethnic-cleansing and
xenophobia often caused by the dominant groups.
Sociology
Name of Paper: Social Movement
Name of Module: Democracy and Social Movements
11
In order to overcome their socio-cultural, economic and political marginalisation, there has been much
group specific collective action in the democratic nation-states. For instance, the unemployed persons
have mobilised several collective actions in the Europe (Didier and Royall 2010). Instances of
collective action against inequalities organised by women, dalits, adivasis, Muslims, elderly, young,
minorities and other marginal groups are found in India (World Bank 2013).
7.3 Protest against Gender inequality and Marginalisation of Women
It has been documented across time and space that inequality based on gender contributes to large
scale marginalisation of women. It is just a coincidence that women are more illiterate, poor,
unemployed, homeless, or manual worker than man. The feminists reacting to such gender inequality
and discrimination eventually developed the feministic ideology known as feminism in the western
world. Then, in course of time, the feminism became a movement that exposed the extent as well as
the reverse of masculine domination. The feminists of different types have organised social
movements for gender equality, equity and equal opportunities in the society, though differently
(Moosa-Mitha 2005).
Thus, the liberal feminists aim at gender equality and equal opportunity, the Marxist feminists
visualize the possibility of women to have equal access to and the control of the capitalistic means of
production, the radical feminists explore the ways to retaliate the masculine repression or escape from
the cage of feminine subordination, the socialist feminists reject gendered based dichotomy like
public–private spheres and emphasizes women’s equal opportunities in public sphere and the
postmodern feminists reveal the linguistic and social construction of gender inequality and
exploitation.
However, the women's movements in different forms are often contested in the countries like India
where religious diversity is tolerated (Sen 2000, Chaudhuri, 2004). But like western wave of
feministic movements we can also have Indian waves of women's movements. The first wave
explicates the reformation of patriarchal practices and mobilization of women's political participation,
the second wave reveals the resurgence in women's political activity and the third wave results in
women's right and empowerment. Furthermore, the contemporary Indian feminism delves with many
unique issues (Chaudhuri 2005).
7.4 Protests against Ethnic Marginalisation
The racial or ethnic inequality perpetuated with social prejudices and stereotypes sometime result in
xenophobia even in the democratic countries. The ethnic causes of unequal treatment and
opportunities or mass incarceration have provoked social movements in many countries. However, in
country like India, Bangladesh, Australia, Canada or Germany where ethnic diversity is prominent,
ethnic conflict becomes endemic. For instance, the ethnic groups like Tamils and Sinhalas in Sri
Lanka, Shias, Sunnis and Kurds in Iraq, Malay and Chinese in Malaysia, Serbs and Croats in the
former Yugoslavia and Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda, Turks in Bulgaria, Greeks in Albania, Kurdish in
Germany, Jews in Hungary and Hmongs in Thailand have engaged themselves in prolonged ethnic
conflicts. Such conflicts also occur when the ethnic minorities challenge their concerned governments
against discriminated policies and programmes (Bates et. al. 2003). For instance, countries like
Srilanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Iraq, Turkey, Democratic Republic of Congo, Somalia, Sudan,
Rwanda, Philippines, Australia, Canada, former Yugoslavia, Germany and the former USSR have
faced such challenges (Hagg & Kagwanja 2007).
Sociology
Name of Paper: Social Movement
Name of Module: Democracy and Social Movements
12
The politics of ethnic identity has of late become an established fact all over the world. The mass
ethnic politics have led to riots, insurgency and civil war in a multi-ethnic country like India. Since its
independence, India has been confronting the challenges of resolving the crisis and troubles related to
its ethnicity - language, religion, tribe, caste, etc. Even the policy of linguistic reorganisation of states
since 1950s could not end this problems. States like Punjab, Kashmir, Jharkhand, Telengana, Assam,
West Bengal including the North Eastern states have witnessed armed conflict and secessionist
movement for long.
8. Democracy and Social Transformation in India
After 1947 India became the largest democracy in the world. She also became a sovereign, socialist,
secular and democratic republic. However, Indian democracy has also been witnessing both
democratic and anti-democratic wave since Independence. Challenges like partition, influx of Hindu
refugees, communal tensions, ethnicity, persistence of caste exclusion and tribal marginalisation have
prompted collective action in many parts of India. This is despite the fact that Indian government,
unlike Pakistan, had promoted administration and army free from theocratic control. The civilian
control of administration and army helped promoting democracy in the beginning (Tilly 2007).
However, the elitist nature of congress party in term of caste, religions and regions soon made
Independent India to move toward an authoritarian and majoritarian democracy. It could not check
majoritarian tyranny against minorities and elite rule against masses. Some early human right
associations emerged in Bengal, Andhra Pradesh and Punjab attempted to move the country toward its
democratisation during post-Independence time. They fought for the rights of the working class, small
peasants, marginal farmers and landless labourer (Kothari, 1989). Another process of democratization
came into being in 1967 when the state level parties suddenly stumbled on power. However, India
witnessed weakening of democracy in 1970s when, faced with so many crises, Indira Gandhi declared
emergency in the country. Jayaprakash Narayan’s total revolution against the authoritarian democratic
regime at the centre at that time signalled the power of social movement to foster democratic values.
As a corollary, the Janata government which came to power later was politically more liberal than the
congress party.
The strengthening of Indian democracy through democratic collective actions continued later. These
movements started pleading for right to information, right to environment, right to rehabilitation, right
to life, right to self-assertion and against undemocratic practices in the country. Indian democracy
emerged in its unique forms in 1990s and coalition politics strengthened the dynamics of
democratisation. Now, it is also increasingly confronting the challenges of multiparty politics and rise
of civil society activism in the form of anti-corruption movement. The democratic dividend is also
evident in caste losing its hierarchical significance (Srinivas 2003). Media exposures of undemocratic
practices have also strengthened the voices of civil society.
But, at the same time, processes related to de-democratisation due to inter-religious conflict and inter-
ethnic conflicts in the country found new expressions and language. One may however argues that
these are in reality expressions against the homogenising tendencies of Indian state. The sub-
nationalist movements for separate state (Bodo Land, Gorkha Land, Khalistan etc) challenged the
centralised politics in India. At the other spectrum, environmental movements like Chipko movement,
Appico movement, Silent Valley movement and Narmada Bachao Andolan (Shah, 2004) are able to
Sociology
Name of Paper: Social Movement
Name of Module: Democracy and Social Movements
13
critique certain modern processes of development. Issues of gender, minority, dalit, and tribals are
also finding new routes of expressions. As a result India is witnessing contrary processes of
democratisation and de-democratisation. The real challenges India confronts now include separatism,
casteism, religious fundamentalism, leftist extremism, along with socio-economic issues like
inequality, exclusion and marginalisation.
Obviously, the ideals of democracy are yet to fully realised and actualised in India today. The studies
on post-independence social change reflect both complementary and contradictory relationship
between democracy and social transformation. Despite India being a large and diverse democracy,
there is continuity of poverty, unemployment inequality, along with issues like casteism,
communalism, and regionalism. Despite the long saga of rural development programmes and
introduction of Panchayats in rural India, issues of disparity, deprivation, displacement and divide
persist in rural India (Jodhka 2002; Alexander 2000; Oommen 1985 & 1984).
In liberalised India, the economic and political elites have been able to exert their influence in each
and every sphere of social life. The religious and cultural minorities very often become targets of
Majoritarian politics. Increasing occurrences of crimes, corruption, public violence, and public
insecurity encircle us as we move towards a global society. The process of rich becoming richer is
accompanied by the poor getting encircled by ‘poverty regime’ (Breman 2007) in the countryside.
Rise of violence against Dalits, tribals and other minorities is a testimony to the growing culture of
intolerance in contemporary India. All these prove that we have hardly made use of the democratic
dividend during the last six decades of Indian independence and also allowed extremism to grow at
certain pockets. We might conclude with Balakrishnan (2016) that India has failed to nurture
individual and collective capacities. There has been far too little effort in public policy to create spaces
where citizens interact freely and peacefully.
Self-Check Exercise 2
Q 1. Explain the extent of social transformation caused by democracy in India
The political dynamics of Indian democracy has brought a significant social transformation among
Indian citizens. The Indian democracy could inculcate democratic sense of law-abiding, self-
disciplined and social and moral responsibilities among its citizens at present. The democratic rules of
law, constitutional safeguards, statutory commissions, political rights, legal rights, etc, have been
challenging the primordial social order of Indian society. The hierarchical society traditionally based
on the ritual purity and pollution has been debunked and demystified to a large extent in modern India.
Indian democratic regime over the decades has matured enough to handle caste-based stigma, gender
stereotypes and tribal isolation. The horizontal competition among the castes could weaken the
vertical caste solidarity in the countryside since long. The combined opposition of dalit, women, and
tribal and minority voters is increasingly becoming evident in all types of elections. From political
campaign to political participation, from developing a common platform to forming responsible
government, these groups have been increasingly asserting their presence.
Q 2. Explain the limit of social transformation caused by democracy in India.
The ideals of democracy are yet to fully realised and actualised in India today. Studies on post-
independence social change reflect both complementary and contradictory relationship between
democracy and social transformation. Despite India being a large and diverse democracy, there is
Sociology
Name of Paper: Social Movement
Name of Module: Democracy and Social Movements
14
continuity of poverty, unemployment inequality, along with issues like casteism, communalism, and
regionalism. Despite the long saga of rural development programmes and introduction of Panchayats
in rural India, issues of disparity, deprivation, displacement and divide persist in rural India. In
liberalised India, the economic and political elites have been able to exert their influence in each and
every sphere of social life. The religious and cultural minorities very often become targets of
Majoritarian politics. Increasing occurrences of crimes, corruption, public violence, and public
insecurity encircle us as we move towards a global society. The process of rich becoming richer is
accompanied by the poor getting encircled by ‘poverty regime’ in the countryside. Rise of violence
against Dalits, tribals and other minorities is a testimony to the growing culture of intolerance in
contemporary India. All these prove that we have hardly made use of the democratic dividend during
the last six decades of Indian independence and also allowed extremism to grow at certain pockets.
9. Summary
So far democracy is found to be the most desirable form of government against monarchy, theocracy,
oligarchy, anarchy and dictatorship worldwide. Further elevation to democracy - the liberal
democracy - also claims to ensure no majority rule to suppress the rights of minority, to oppress the
movement of citizens/civil societies and to disrupt the democratic possibilities in its actual
functioning. The empirical evidences however do not completely support the theoretical possibilities.
The conceptual-empirical dilemma demystifies the illusions of democracy at present global scenario.
It often deviates from the free and fair election, perpetuates with bureaucratic inertia and ritualism,
cannot avoid biased media and develops either an oligarchic form of government or polyarchic form
of government. It is a matter of concerns that the democratic regime seems to have gone far away
from its true democratic spirit perpetuating with colonial legacy, western aristocracy, feudalism and
national elitism in the world. In this context, we cannot think of a democracy without thinking of
citizens’ safety, liberty, rights and equality. Likewise we also cannot attain it fully without collective
action. The collective actions or social movement promotes democracy like political activism. It
shapes and reshapes democratic government thereby exploring and extending the democratic regime
in flexible and viable direction. It is just like the moving wheels without which no government can run
or speed up.
Charles Tilly’s approach to democracy epitomises this facts comprehensively. Now the civil rights
movements, environment movements, anti-nuclear movements, anti-war movements, etc. prompted by
mass politics and mass movements in the nation-states are leading toward two important political
processes - democratization and de-democratization. While the former process refers to a movement
towards broader, more equal, more protected and more consultative relations, the latter process refers
to its opposite. The mass movements as direct collective actions also disrupt the smooth functioning of
political institutions. It so happens that the people in power then take policy decisions in haste without
going through the merits of real political issues. Such populist politics is therefore considered anti-
democratic in nature.
It is also true that protest movements whether mass-driven or elite inspired or both have been
challenging the autocratic governments all over the world. However, the nature and result of citizens’
protest movement against autocratic governments is region specific and elite or mass specific. For
instance, unlike western type, the Arab’s revolts have been causing a network of diffusion for protest
movement against autocracy in the Arab-majority states of North Africa and Middle East. Arab
springs revolve around many issues - local, regional, national and international. In other words, while
Sociology
Name of Paper: Social Movement
Name of Module: Democracy and Social Movements
15
targeting their respective autocratic governments, these movements also challenged the western
politics of democratisation as countermovement.
Similarly the ethnic conflict and women’s movement also reveal unique undercurrent. There are many
empirical events where the ethnic movements keep on mobilising collective actions for the provisions
of affirmative discrimination, regional autonomy and ethnic state, ethnic separation and secession.
However, due to lack of required strategy, resources and support in organising collective actions the
ethnic minorities usually suffer from genocide, ethnic-cleansing and xenophobia caused by ethnic
majority worldwide.
The women have also been uniquely organising protest movement against gender inequality and
discrimination in the world. The Feminists are able to expose the extent as well as the reverse of
masculine domination in the western world. The different types of feminism - liberal, radical, Marxist,
socialist and post-modern are energizing the women’s’ movement differently at global scenario.
Consequently, feminist waves have emerged to reveal and rectify the gender based inequality and
marginalization in the society.
Nevertheless all these movements and counter movements have resulted in the democratic and anti-
democratic waves in the global level. In the former wave, the changes brought forward by the reforms
or revolution often lead to more democratic government whereas in the case of later, the changes
brought forward by the revolution may lead to less or no democratic government. After the first,
second and third waves of democratisation in 1820–1926, 1945–62 and 1970s respectively, the world
democracy has been confronting a reverse wave as argued by Habets and Huntington.
In this context, the Indian example provides us a brilliant story of both success and failure of a
democratic regime. After 1947 India became the largest democracy in the world. However, owing to
several socio-economic, political and demographic reasons, India democracy has witnessed turbulence
since Independence. The elitist nature of Indian political system soon made Independent India to move
toward an authoritarian and majoritarian democracy. It could not check majoritarian tyranny against
minorities and elite rule against masses. But, at the same time, fight against Emergency and
authoritarian regime strengthened the dynamics of democratisation. India continues to face challenges
like terrorism, political extremism, communalism, fundamentalism and regionalism. The religious and
cultural minorities very often become targets of Majoritarian politics. Increasing occurrences of
crimes, corruption, public violence and public insecurity encircle us as we move towards a global
society.
The opening of media control since economic liberalisation also had visible impact in popularising
public discontentment. Grassroots empowerment of people through local self government has
extended the corridors of power to the countryside. Further, the human right associations and civil
societies have been moving the country toward its democratisation over the time. Use of strategies like
filing of public interest litigation (PIL), seeking information under Right to Information Act,
formation of citizen awareness programmes, political campaigns, NGO movement etc., have
benefitted Indian democracy. The hierarchical society traditionally based on the ritual purity and
pollution has been debunked and demystified to a large extent in modern India. The democratic rules
of law, constitutional safeguards, statutory commissions, political rights, legal rights, etc, have been
challenging the primordial social order in the society. The democratic regime over the decades has
matured enough to handle caste-based stigma, gender stereotypes and tribal isolation in post-
Independent India. The political dynamics of Indian democracy with a vibrant multi party system and
Sociology
Name of Paper: Social Movement
Name of Module: Democracy and Social Movements
16
tolerating protest movements have brought a significant social transformation in India today
notwithstanding continuation of certain issues of social, economic and political concerns.