Nothing is lost, nothing is created, everything is transformed: from labor movements to anti-austerity protests

Book Chapter

Reference

Nothing is lost, nothing is created, everything is transformed: from labor movements to anti-austerity protests

GIUGNI, Marco, GRASSO, Maria

GIUGNI, Marco, GRASSO, Maria. Nothing is lost, nothing is created, everything is transformed:

from labor movements to anti-austerity protests. In: Cristina Flesher Fominaya and A. Feenstra.

Routledge handbook of contemporary european movements: protest in turbulent times . London, New York : Routledge, 2020. p. 129-141

Available at:

http://archive-ouverte.unige.ch/unige:130709

Disclaimer: layout of this document may differ from the published version.

9

NothinE ^is lost, nothing is created, everything ^is transformed

Fnom labon moverylents to anti-austenity protests

Marca Ciugni and Maria ^Crosso

lntroduction

The

emergence ancl mobilization

of

social nrovenents rests

on the politicization of

social and cultural cleavages (Kriesi

et

à1., 1995). This has given rise

to

a variety of movements and protest waves

in

European history along

with

a fundamental transforrnation of the lepertoires

of

contention

(Tiily,

1986, 1995).

This

chapter examines the historical evolution

of

labor, new social novernents, ancl Global Justice Movements

in

^'Westem Europe. Additionally, we also consider the more recent rnobilizartonby anti-austerity movements during the econotnic cnsis that struck Europe

in

the recent past.

We

staft our accolrrtt

tom

the labor movements, which ma1, be considered as the

first

motiern social rnovement, and then considel the other tirree rnovernents or' lTrovenent families.

The specific features of social movenentsr such ^as the amount of pt:otest they produce or the prevailing fonas of action they use, vary

in

important ways âcross coutrtries (I{riesi et al., ^1995).

'While

acknowiedging this and noting

relevalt

cross-nationa.l difrelences, here we focus on the comnonalities ancl tr-encls

rv[ich

tend to c]raractedze the social movement sectof in all European countries, albeit to valyrng degrees. Thus, ^r,ve

look

at both the continuities and discontinuities behveen these movements 01' lrrovenlent fanrfies. We

will point

out ûr particular: the r:ole that recent protest rvaves have had irr shifting the nrain focus ofsocial conflict and

in

bringing back into the protest ar-ena

'old' ol

redisajbutive concerns. As ochers have pointed out (Della Porta, 2015), both GiobalJustice Movements but above all anti-austeriry illovetrrents and protests have brought questions of reclistriburion and capitalisrn back into protest politics. Additionally, u'e ^also Put forward a r-elated and more speculative ârgulrent according to

u'hich

GlobalJusrice Move- ments can be seen as a coltinuation of the new social movements feanrring a scale shift â'om the local and nadonal leveis

to

the global level. Global Justice Movements,

in

tllr'n, can be ^{seen as} having _{)rad â} strong spillover.effect on anti-ar-rsteriry r)rovemenLs in rrtany respects. lrt this pt'occss.

both global jusdce

alcl

anr]-austeriry nrovemcnts have helpcd

to

le-enrphasize various dirnen- stons

of the role of

capitaiisrn and

of

^{the uriequal} distriburion

of

resources

in

^{the sphere}

of

Marco Ciugni and Maria Crasso

contentious politics. This, we maintain, has 1ed to a homogenization of plotest âmong old _and new movements which is the result of rhe shared experiences of mobilization

within

the Global Justice Movement and similarly heterogeneous fonnations as weil as of the conrmon goals _and

target ofprotest participânts in these lnoveûlents.

Our

account follows thlee main steps, each covering a specific phase in the evolution _{of the} movel11ents at ha-nd. In the first step, \,ve discuss the labor movements and new social movements as characterizing a sPace

in

i,vhich the national context represents the ma.rn frame constraining and molding their mobilization. The second srep is characterized by the rise of the GlobaiJusdcl Movements, which accorcling

to

our working hypothesis have contributed

in

a substantial _wa1.

to bringing together

'old'

and

'new'

social movement issues and mobilizations. Moreover, they have doue so rvhile also shifting the scale from the nationâl

to

rhe transnational arena. Finallj, the

third

and rnore recent step

in

this process has r,vitnessed the strong rnobilization

of

anti- austerity movements as â response to the econonic crisis of recent yean as well as to the imple- mentation of austedry policies

in

many European colrnfries (see Giugrri, 2001 for an altemadve accoLrnt ofprotest politics in Europe ernphasizing tire role ofcleavages).

Labor movernents and new social movernents: two worlds apart

Labor movements have long been coruidered the main driving force of industrial societies. From a Tillean perspective, they ^resultecl from the process ofindustrialization and the rise ofcapitalism

as new intelests of the rvorking class were created and the opposirion berween capital and labor emerged. Historically, the working class has been organized and represented

in

the rlu'ee main arenas

for

the articulation

of

coliective

- ⁱⁿ

^{this cæe, class}

-

interests: by leftist

-

^communisr,

socialist, labor or social-democratic

-

^paties

ⁱⁿ

the parry arena, by trade unions

in

the interest- mecliafion arena, and by labor movements

in

the social ûlovements arena. Each of these three aspects has fonned distinct bodies of r'vork, that have often talked past each orher hor,vever bur

with

sorne overlap berween labor and trade union movefitent works,

for

example. Given their cenûal place

in

industrial conflicts and relations, there is an abundant literanrre on labor rnove- nrents, acldressing various àspects (see Fantasia

&

Stepan-Norri s, 2004 for a revierv). This includes resear-ch

on

trade unions as well as works focusing on the role of strikes as a specific forrn

of

aclion in the movernents'repenoire of conrenrion (Cohn, 1993; Shorter &TtJly,IC)74).

Alongside the weakening of the traditional cieavages, Europe has witnessed a strengthening of new cleavages during the 20th century.

A

key transfornlation

in

this legald is the increasing salience

of

a new cleavage that gave rise

to

the so-called new social movenlents,

In

this per- spective, the traditional labor-capital strrrggle linked

to

tlade unions ancl the wor.ker-s' move- nlent had become less prominent relative

to 'new'

struggles

in

the post-war period. Inglehart's (1977) postmaterialist theory is often refèrred to

in

relation

to

enlergence

ofthis

new cleavage.

It

provides a theoretical underpinning

for

the value change that unclerlies the rise and mobil-

ization of new

social movements. Inglehart (1977) famously suggested

that the

^'advanced

indr-rstrial societies' r.r'itnessed a cultural shift

-

^{a 'silent} revolution'

-

^from a matel-ialist vahre

'system

emphasizing

socioeconomic

nee

ds as well as social order and securiry

^to

â

postnâterialist vah.re system stressing

individual participation,

emancipation,

and

^self- fulfilhnent. This r,vas understood

to

be clue

to

increased. social

mobiliry,

the clevelopnlenr

of

a mass education systeln, and above all post-World War

II

econonric growth

with

the related expansion

of

the wellàre stâte that resr"rlted

in

rising econornic well-being. Thus, accorclirrg to the postmaterialism thesis, material security bror.rght

the fonnation of

those fypes

of

^values

emphâsizing self-expression and univer-sal moral canses tvhich are seen to be conclr,rcive

to

the developnrent of ^p oscmaterialisnr'

Labor movements to anti-austerity protests

Inglehalt's postmaterialist thesis is rootecl

in

a

thcory of

stnrctulal change anci cleals u,ith the:-ise of :r tre\\' value cleavage. Othels have also stlrdied the stluctur-al bases of srich a va]ne clear,age.

In

this regar:d, scholars have

noted hou, the core

participants

in new

types

of

illovemellts u'ere largely dlau'n

flom

the niidclle classes ancl particulady

f}om

specific sector.s

rheleof

(cotgfove & Dufl

1980;

Eder,

1993; Kr.iesi, 1989).

In

parriculâr, I{r.iesi (19g9)

;rrgued

that

'social*cuitural speciaiists,'

â

par-ticulâr segnlent

of the

erner-grng

rlew

midclle 6lx5s, displayed left-libertariatr values artd vvele ovef-repr-esented irr neu, social movernents.

Labot' nlovernerlts

and nerv

social nro\zenrents harte

often

been contr-astecl

in

terlrrs

of

rheir social ^bases, organizational fomrs, and vahre orientations. Accolding

to

^pichardo (1997), rhe ^centl'a1 factor

fiom u'hich

everrything else llov,,s

in

the neur socia-l rnovement paradign is rhe ideological distinctiveness

of

neu, social movements (Dalton et al., 1990).

The ârnda'rer-

tal bt'eak is i.tnderstood

in

temls

of

a changed focus û-om economic r:edistribr-rtion (rvorking- ciass ntot'etnettts)

to

quality

of life

and lifesq'le concelrrs, tl-re 'questio'ing

of

rvealth*ori.r-rte.1 naterjalistic goals

of

indr-rsnial societies' as

rvell

as

of

'r'epreseltarive denrocr.acies

that li'rit

crÛzen

input

and participation

itr

got'emance, instead advocating direct clemocracy, seJf* help sroups, and coopelative styles

of

sociirl organizarion' (Pichar.do,

1997:

414).

In this

rvay, thetues

of âutollollly

and idendry ai'e understood

to

have become centr-al

to the new

social movenlents (OTIe, 1985).

'With

_respect

to

ideological uniqueness. self-reflexivity

is

also seen as inrportant (Pichardo, 1997) as leflected

in

the questioning

of

rneaning

of

action (Gr-rsfield, 1994; lVlelucci' 1994) and therefole the choice

of

sû-ucture ancl actions

which

nor.e clearl1,

reflect

the

^aims

of the moverlent,

as

for

example

in the

ferninist consciousness raising groups (I{atzenstein

&

Mr"rller, 1987).

With

lespect

to

tactics, nerv social movernents have a

predilectiol for

1on-institutionâi nrodes of pârticjpation

in line rvith

their perception

of

the nonrepr-esentariveless

of

existe't state der-uocr-atic sfi'uctttres (Pichardo, 1997).

Theil critique

_{of the} state as a

legiti'rate - ^or

^at

ieast a privileged

* _{cha'nel of}

replesentation,

led therl to

create ân âutonornous space

fol

actron foctlsing on non-institutional nteans and fomrs of participation,

incltrdilg ryrr.bt;c

trc*

ttcs Horvever''

sone new

social movements also use

nlore

pressure gr:oup type strategies, as

noted by Eder'(1985),

while

others have gained âccess

to

clecision-making

or-linked to

the formatioD ofpolitical pâfiies contesting elections such as,

fol

example, Gr.een parties (Kitschelt,

1989)'

with

rcspect

to

tactics, thelefore,

it

is hard

to

see hour nerv social

'rovernents ^differ fiorn any of the pleceding or subsequent rnovements

in

that, like other lnovenents, _they

foc's

otr those tactics u4rich arc

in

a given context cleemed most useful folenacting the goals of the nrovellrent. Yet, the tbcus on influencing public opinion

-

bv raisins â\ ,areness, for example

*

and the use of uredja

in

^{highly visr-ral} carnpaigns carried our

by

a snrall group

of

activists (for exarnple, Grecnpeace spectaculâr clirect actions), cotrl.d be seen as an

innovatiol

r,r,ith respect to tactics of nerv social

'rorrernents cornpared to the labor movements of old focusing

o' iru-

tests'

picketli.es

and rvildcat strikes. Mor:eovel-, one conld argue that the

characrer.ùp.*.ru

iras charlgecl atlcl that

they

have become more celebratory ancl ritualistic and less confi.onta- tional

rvith rleu'

social movelnents

-

^see

^for

^exarnple

^National

Clinrate Marches across Europe 'With

-

^{ancl fbcused on} celebratirrg a certain type of iclentity.

respect

to

strllcrure, nerv social movements are seen

to

favor-

fluid

over- oJigarc6ic otganizational sryles,

lor

example through rotating leacler-ship,

voring conxlunally, a'cl

so l-onh

!orÈ'

^{1985). Given}

^their

opposition

to

rhe bureaucratization

of

sociery and

its

dehu- nranrzing tetrclencies,

they

are also seen as opposing these trends

in their

orvn organization jiulportrng

itrstead

rtrole

culturally libeltarian change

ailowing

indivicluals

,no.. J.oi." fol

""'t-organization (Pichalclo, 1997). Concerns over cooptation,

in

particular, ale central

in

the '"dY

thr'

ot'ganizations

ale

stmctr:r'ed. Such tlends

ard .oncern,

were particulally rnarkecl

:ir

Marco Ciugni and Maria Crasso

within

the autonomc vorume) and have

",::'oi;'J"i:,T:i:T'l;:T,ïi"*::l;,,iiï:1'#; iii;.iJiîîl;*:

ments more generaiiy, inciuding

in the

Globai Justice Movement

which ,r. d;.,"rr; ;;;;;

(Della Porta, this volume).

with

respect to pa.ticipants, the focus tends ro be that a

'new'

nriddle class, employed in nonprodnctive econornic secrors, forms an inrportant sociaj base (Kriesi. [989; Riidip.. lqnqr Moreover,

it

js those indivicruajs

not

bouncr

to

profir modve rhar are

;;* ;il;i;-;Jï:i

as

new

social rnovement constituencies (Pichai'clo, 1997) ancl employecl

in

areas that _are more dependent

on

state spending

(Ofiè,

1985).

Conflict

orrer

th. control of work

is _also noted where proGssionals'

.orrtrol

based on expe'tise and skills and

work

autonomy _comes

into

contrast

with

adnrinistration so that _the ski-lls ancl service-oriented professionals _become a key sffuctuml support

for

new social movernents, all of

which

critique technocr.acy (Kriesi

et

aJ', 1995).

For offe

(19g5) the

new

miciclle classes are supported

ày.r.r.,r.rrt, of

the old middle _{class as} welr as rhose

'or

^{heavily engaged}

i'

tt

" ^rruài ;;.;.

Moreover, pichado (1997) notes

how

there tends

to

be a lack

oipanicipation

by

minority

comrnuniries

in

most

new social

nrovenlents.

^--)

The rise of the new

social movements raisecl

a

nurnber

of

debaces among scholars.

one of them

was

whether and to what extent they

r,vere qualitatively different _frorn

older

movements'

rnost notably labor movemenh.

Indeed, picharclo (1997) notes that overall

the

differences befween

new

social movernents ancl

labor

and

other

^.olcl, move- ments are

not

so great. and even where

key

characteristics

of new

social movements such as

the

âbove are noted there are

-"ny ."..prions, for

exampre

in

tacticar mocles which

tend to be

diverse

including the institutioni; th" middle

class

is nor rhe only

basis for protest and so

fbrth' Moreover, old

collective action mobilizations

coltinue to

exist, par-

ticularly with

protests emanating

around

redistributive _ancl

labor

issues

which tend

to

invoive

trade

unions' calhoun

(1993) challenges rhe distinction arguing

that

olcier social ûl.vemenrs were nor simpry economistic. Here

Melucci

(1gg4) stres"sed that the key ques_

tion

was whether

their

meaning and place

in

sociery and social relations was dre same or had changed'

As

such

the

answer

to this

question _depends

on what o'tlook

one takes

and

which

types

of

ciraracterisrics one foc,rre,

o'. Theie is

a great _deal

of

continuiry thar can be seen between not

just

iabor ancl new social movementi,

but

also the global justice and anti-austeriry Ûrovements

thât followed.

Flowever, there are also sorne differences in terms

of

the focus and social bases, rnost clearly.

Global fustice Movements: bringing the two worrds together and shifting the scale

The start

of

the

third

millennium brought

to

the _{fore a 11ew} type

of

movemenr focusing the cririque

of

neoliberal globalization and

of

the lirnits

of

democracy

o'

rhe global scale (Deila Porta,2007a' 2007b,2009,2015; Juris, 2007; Maeckelbergh, 2009). They have been cailed various

temls -

^{also depending}

on the cotrntry

_{and language}

*

_such as antiglobalization movement'

no

global movelnent, movement

for

globalization

from

below, ntouuernent alter- mondialiste, Grobarisienmgkritische Betuegurzg, Grobar Justice

Move-"",, ."a sdil

others. Here

we

refer

to the'r

as

the

Groba-l Justice Movements _{(see arso}

Daphi,

this vorume), a

te'n which

is most often used

in

the Anglo-Saxon literaftrre.

It

also uncierscores a cornmon fea- ture of the actors involved

in

these movements: their

wilringn.rr

ro

ngi,

"grrnst injrstices ar

the global levei. Indeed, Global Justice Movements may be ciefined as

.i

Labor movements to anti-austerity protests the loose

network of

organizations (of varying degrees

of

ôrmariry, and including even political parties) end other âctors, engaged

in

collective action

of

various kinds,

on

the bæis

of the

shared concern

to

advance rhe cause of justice (economic, _social, political and environmental) among and berween peoples across the globe.

(Della Porta, 2007a: 1g4) The key event, which

for

some represents the 'ofiicial' _start

of

^the Global Justlce Movement,

wasthe so-called 'batde

of

Seattle' This expresslon refers to the protests that occurred at the ministerial conference

of

the

w

orld Trzde Otgarlizatron

(wro),

whichaimedto _the

of

^prepare

launclung ^newnegoHâtlon round the so-called Millennium Round and took place between ³⁰November andJDecember_1nSeattle

(usA).

These protestsstagedby

of

and such

vanety o:rgaruzations groups, asnon-governmentâl ofgaruzatrons(NGOr), social movements, uruons and students, among others, has become the symbol

of

the struggle âgatnst neoliberal-

$m ^and

fot

democracy frorn below' Yet, the roots

of

the movements âre much older as Protests agamstinternationalfinancial or econofiIlc orgaruzatlons suchasthe

wTo,

the

w

^orld

Bank, the International Monetâry _{Fund (rMF)}

or

the G7

/G8

and later the G20 lMere already present 1n the 1980s and 990s, albeit on a smaller scale.

It

ls tn particular after the Seattle events, however, that such p1'otests were staged on at\ almost regular basis at every singl. international meeting

for

acertain nurnber

of

years, unrilthemovement startedto fade Lway1nthe mid-2000s. The Seattle andlater protest events gavepublic visibility to thecritique

of

neoliberal globalization, butsuch criticism had already been present.

Parallel to the action1nthestreets, GlobaI Justice Movements ^have brought tothefore

affirm

their

^new

'ways to agenda: parallei surruruts, social forums the

w

^{orld Social} Forum, the Social

Forun

aswell as vanety

of

national and local social forums and global

days

of

actron. Thêse types grew steadily 1n the first

half of

the 2000s (Pianta 2004)

In

this we may distinguish betweentwomâ1nforms taken bythemobilization

of

Global Just- Movemenls: street demonstrations and protest activities addressed agâ1nst maJof lnter- 'national govemmentâl or pnvate rnslrtutrons or ofgaruzauons, on the one hand, and social

âswell âsexpenments

with

deliberarive democracy, on the other (Giugnietâ1. 2006) One

of

the

k.y

features

of

^Globa1Justice Movements ^{lies 1n} their heterogeneity

Porta, 2007b; strong

Eggert

&

Giugni, 20r2) Ttris heterogeneous character AS opposed, notably, to the much more homogeneous nature

of

labor movements is visible

ln

aspects

of

the movement. To begin

with,

rt

caî

be seen1n the issues they addressed.

Justice Movements have e wide rânge

of

claims and mo bilize around different lssues-

of

_{them were the core}

of

their mobilization: the struggle âgalnst neoliberalisirr and promodon

of

democracy On the one hand, Global Justice Movements mobilized

lSSUes relating to the redistribution

of

resources aswell âsnotrons

of

_JUStrCe, solidariry democracy on a global scale. Onthe other hand, they calledfor greater participation

of ln

decision-making _processes and arenâs both at the iocal and global level. More

Glo bât Justice Movements have emerged and mobiiized around both distributive issues, and therefore they combine aspects relating to both labor and new movements (Giugru etal. 2006) bridgingtogether thesetwo sectors.

The strong emphasis placed by GIobai J^ustrce Movements democracy

ievels, on cân be seen àt

fronr. thecntlclsm

of

^thedemocratic deficit1nintemational lnsÛtutl0ns,

and decision-making organ

arenas, to the skepticism towards traditional, representatlve to the promotton

of

^altemative forms

of

democracy

in

parAclila4 pârtrcrpâtory deiiberati ve forms

of

decision-making were

k"y

to the movements and implemented

interna.l functioning, 1n addition to being publicly stated

pella

Porta, 2005a, 2009;¹ⁿ

Marco Ciugni and Maria Crasso

Della Porta

& Rucht,

2013). As such,

one

can sày that the organization of social fonirn5 _xn6 pârticipation

in

experiments

with

deliberative democracy have become

part of th. a.tloi

repertoire

of

these movements (Giugni

er

a1.,2006).

To

be sure, patticjparory

r"r-,

"ra.Ji

sion-making and democracy

were not new: they

were arreacry present

in th. new

_soclal movements, so

that we

see

a point of continuiry

between

the

br,vo fypes

of *o".*.n,J

However, Global Justice Movements incorporated them

into

their public discourse,

i" ;;:

ition to trying

to implement _them

-

^not al,vays successfuliy

-

internally.

Although

the struggle against neoJiberalism and the promotion

of

democracy for.mecl the core claims, a variety

of

secondary issues and claims were brought

in

also

by ori.., gro;f,

ancl movements. Global _Justice Movements

include a

variery

of

social, generationJ, _ariJ ideological groups as

well

as organizations

from

differenr countries (Della porta, 2005a). The breadth of the social basis of the movement is documented

in

a number of studies conclucted on participants at

key

events,

like

che Eu'-opean Social Forums as

well

as protests staged by the movement ât vârious intemational summits (Della Porta, 2005b, 2009; Oella porta _{et at.}

2006; FiJlieule et â1., 2005). Futherrnore, often the events staged by rhe movemenrs saw the presence

at many

demonsrrarions

of the so-calied ,black bloc' (Dupis_Déri,

₂₀₀₇₎ a transnational group

of

young radicals, often drawn

from

social centers,

who often.rrg"g.â in

violent encounters

with

the police at protest events stated

by

the movement.

Besides

their

strong heterogeneiry, Global Justice Movements are obviously characterized

by their

trânsnational reach. Transnacional forms

of

contention are

not

new, and were surely

not

invented

by the

GlobalJustice Movements (Della Porra

er

a1., 1999; Smith

*Johnston,

2002; see Smith' 2004

for

a review). GlobalJustice Movenenrs, however, have an inherently transnational

-

^global

-

character. As such, they epitomize â process

of

'scale shift, (McAdam et al', 2001) moving the locus of contention from the national

-

^the rnditional focus of previ- ous movements

- ^to

^{the global level. Far}

^from

^emerging

in

a vacuurn, social rnovements anci protest aclions are slrongly influenced

by

the political and insuiurional conrext

in

which they take place. This

view

has most forcefirlly _been

put

forward

by

polirical

oppofirniry

theorists (see Kriesi, 2004;

Meyer,

20A4 for reviews).

While

some have tried

to

go beyoncl this focus and tried

to

examine a-iso the role of supranational opportunities (Delia

port"

_{6g Tarrow, 2005;}

Tanow,

2001,2005), political opporrLrniry theory has mosr often focused on narionâl oppor- runities and constrainls- Given its strong transnational character, one of the questions pertainiag

to the

Global Jusrice Movement

is

whether national oppornnides and corxtraints are still important

for

this movernent âs they were shown

to

be for previons movements, most notably labor and new social ntovelnents.

While it

is undeniable that Global Justice Movements ^have expressed a shift fi'om the national

to

the global level and that they are subject

to

supranational âctors

to

a. gïeater extent than pr-evious movements and protests, they were atso

,ti1

strongly embedded

in

the nationai context.

More

generally, the 'classic social movement agenda' stres- sing such mobilizing structures, (national) polirical opporhrnities, and framing

p.o..rr.r, *hil.

needing to be

adapted

to some extent, still helps to expiain mobilization of

^such

a tlansnalional movement (Giugru

et

a1., 2006).

In

other words, national opportgnities ^and constrâints are important

to

account

for the

characteristics a1cl. mobilization even

of

more genuine rransnational movements (Tanow

&

Della porta, 2005).

In

sum, Giobal Justice Movernents broke

into the

scene and stalted entering

the

nelvs after the 'Battle

of

Seattle' 1n 1'999. Flowever,

their

roots were deeper, suggesting that these moveû1ents

built

upon past experiences

of

organizational institutionalization,

but

also gpon reflexive criticisms

of it

(Della Porta, 2005a).

As

such, Global _Justice Movements cân ^be understood as emerging

out

of the protest lvave carriecl

by

the new socia.l movements

in

the previotrs

flvo

decades (Giugru et a1.,2006). Issues, or-ganizattonalfonns,

but to

some extent

Labor movements to anti-austerity protests

âlso collstituencies tveLe

in

palt

inported tonr

th.rt prcvious plotest \\/àvr'.

At

the sarle time, çhs1, cornbilred

'old'

and

'netl"

issues and constituencies, therefble ploducing a rup?rochanrcnt l)eflveerl t\\ro protest sectols that had lernainccl lalgely distutct

*

and stuclied a.s snch

- ⁱⁿ

^the

oast.

Yet,

^the

ôrnlel

seenrinqly disappeared

fi'oin

^the

publlc

stage as quickly as

they

blsks i,-,to

it

^{a ferv} 1,s21'5 earliel.

Did

otlter morremerrts take Llp

theil

^legacy?

Anti-austerEty rmovernents: brir"rginE aap[talisnn and

socÊaË cEass

back lnto Europeaa'l

soaËal rYiove!'ments

prcceded b)' a financial clisis that stâfted off

in

the U.S. as a credit cmnch linked

to

the so*

cailed'housing bubble', ^stârtillg fi'onr 2008, Europe rvas

hit by

one

of

the deepest econonric recessions

in its

historl', a prolonged

period of lou' ol

negâtive econcirnic

glou'th

coupled rvrtl-r r-ising uneurpioynrent thât eventllally became knorvn as the 'Greât Recession'.

While

in the U.S. the ^{crisis rn'as} officiaily declar:ed as finished in June ²⁰⁰⁹

*

_{so, about onc and a half}

yeals aftel

it

stalted

- ⁱⁿ

^Eulope

^it

^has had the most

ploforind

and long-lasting impacts, also due

in palt to

the allsteliq' policies irnplemcnted

to

^address

it, u.hich

has been argued to have fur'ther corrpoulrcied existing problems (Iftlrgman, 2012; Stielitz,2012).

The

deep ecotronric clisis,

but

^above

all the

austenry measuïes taken

by

goverillnents (lSenneo

&

Ilartels, 2u14), led crtizens

in

many

* _{if not}

_all

-

^Eulopean countr-ies

to

take to rhe streets

to

protest against deteliorating conditions. Pelhaps the t$,o rnost u'ell-known pro-

rests

-

^{a sort of} equrvalent of the

'llattle

of Seattle'

for

Global Justice Movements

-

^{were the}

Occupy

Wall

Stleet plotest that

took

place irr Zuccotti Par:k

in

Nerv

Yolk

on September: 17, 2(-)i1 and,

in Eulope, the 15-M

protests

that

occurred

in Madrid on Mav 15 of

the sânre yeâr.

Both

plotests then spread

to

lnany other cities. Plotests wel'e pârticularly lat-ge rn those countries, such as Greece

and

Spain,

that

u'ere

most

deeply affected

by the

^cdsis,

although

jt

_{is r-rnclear}

_to

_u'hat

_extellt

there is a direct relarionship betu'een the crisis and the level

of

protest

(Cinalli & Giugni,

2016). As

Bemeo

and Bartels (2014) have noted, the extent of stich protests and movements nlay have been overstated.

Anti-austelity protests

in

palticr-rlar can

be

seen

to

^have

^fomred

an important shale

of

contetrtion

ol

the most recent period, chalacterized

by

one

of

the most

plofound

cdses ever experietrced

by

advanced clemocracies (Lobera, this volume). Just as r,r'ith.

the

Global Justice Moverttents some

10-15

years earlier,

the

rvave

of

anti-austerify pïotests

that took

place during and

itr the

aftermath

of the

econorrric crisis

in

Er.uope has spr"rlred

much

intelest âmollgst stndents of social rnovements, r.r,ho have examined

in

palticular the Spanish Ltdigna- dos tttoveitrent _ancl the varions Occupy movenlellts (Anceiovici

et

aI., 2016; Castells, 2012;

Della Pofta

& Mattoni,

2014; Flesher Fourinaya

& Cox,

2013; Flesher- Forrrirraya

&

Hayes, 2017; Gamson

&

Siûy, 2013; Giugni

&

Cir-asso, 2015).

The pt'otests against austerity llleasures and poLicies that

took

place during the years of the ecouonlic clisis raise a number

of

questiorrs.

We

briefly adclress three

of

theur here: Can u'e speak

of

a genuine social morrement

or

shor-ild

\ve

râthe1' speâk

of

â selies

of

protests?

Ale

these nrovements

ol

^protests nloLe sin'rilal

to old

or:

to

ne\\r movements? Relatedly, hou, clo

they contpale to

prer,ious movements?

A first

question

is

^urhether

we can

speak

of

a genuine social movement 01'ïather

of

a sedes of pl'otests. Social movetnents;lre organizecl eûbtts, based

on

a shalecl idenrity,

to reach..or-nnon

goal mairrly, thor,rgh

not

excltlsi\/ely, througl.r non-instirLrrional rneans

(Della Porta & Diani, 2006). Thus, the

presence

of

a coilectivc iclentiry

is

constitutive

of

a social rnoveruent.

In

^{other rvor-cls,}

^for

^{a netw'olk}

of

actor:s

to bc

considcled as a social movemellt thele must be an atternpt

to

torge boncls that So beyond the boundaries

of

specific organizarions (Diani,2015).

In

^{this context, sorr-re have}

Marco Ciugni and Maria Grasso

arguecl that there

is

a shared collective

in iight of ^the

^{sharecl focus, at least}

in

Europe, _sn austerity and democracy as

well

as

the

presence

o{ a

process

of

transnational diffusion _.,1 frames and tactics (Feenstra et a1., 201.7; Flesher Forninaya, 2017; Kaldor ec Selchow, 2013).

F{owever,

we might

wonder

whethet the

nefworks

that

have olganized

and

coorclinatç6 anti-atlsterify protests

really do

share

a

collective

identiry in the

intended sense.

In

_thg

absence

of

such bonds amongst participânts, one

might

rather speâk

of a

'protest without movement' (Andretta, 2017).

rt

is perhaps nor

by

chance that many

* _{if not}

_most

- ^of

^the

existing accounts refer

to

them as 'pr-otests', 'opposition',

or

'collective action'.

This

might prefigure _{a trencl}

for

emerging patterns

of

conrention, as the

'thick',

identiry-based mobiliza- tions

*

_{such as by labor and new social} movements, but

in

part also by Global Justice Move- ments

- ^{come to be}

increasingly replaced

by 'thinner'

forrns

of

protest.

More

wor-k is

needed

to

assess

the

organizational basis

of

anti-ausceriry protests as

well

as the presence

of

a collective identity or ât least identification

rvith

a movernent.

A

second question is whether they are more similar

to old or to

new movements. Our or'vn analysis of the social composition, values and action repertoires

of

ânti-àusterity protests suggests that parricipants

in

anti-austerity demonstrations shâre rnore characteristics

lvith

old issr-re denronstrators

than with new

issue ones (Grasso

&

Gir.rgni, 2016a, 2016b).

Anti-

âtlsteriry protests attrâct constituencies that are iess well-educated and nriddle class than new issue demonstrations.

Moreover,

we

wish

to

stress the importance

of

the suppiy

of

^p1'otest and

the

distinction between protests around different issues: cuts

in

pi"rblic spending and services

for

the more deprived groups

will

^provoke individuals

to

take

to

the streets against these perceived injust- ices.

In

this regard, together

with

other recent movements, the wave of anti-austerity protest has

brought

scholars' attenlion back

to

ciass-based and redistriburive issues focusing

on

the struggle against existing social ancl econornic inequaLities. In particular, scholars have recentiv called

for

rnore attention

to

capitalism

in

social rnovemenr theory (Della Porta, 2015; Het- land

&

Goodrvin, 2073) as we witness ever-growing inequality across the globe.

In

this way, tlrese types

of

event can be understoocl

to

attract a different

crowd to

the one that attends rnore rinralistic, peaceful demonstrative events.

Our

resr"rits show that issues matter and thar anti-âLlsterity protests attrâct less well-educated

and

nriddle,class constiflrencies

than

new isstte demonstrations (Grasso

& Giugni, 20I6b). Moreover,

these constitnencies are less

organizationally ernbedded than those

at old

issue p1-otests and so are more resorlr-ce-poor, also

with

respect

to

organizational capabilities (Grasso

&

Giugru, 2016b).

Ar

the sarne rime,

they

are more

likely to be

drawn û'om younger generarions

or to

be students, suggestû1g

that

anti-austeriry movements have

brought new

groups

of young

peopie

to the

streets (Grasso

&

Giugni, 2016b).

A third,

reiated question is

horv do

anti-austerity protests relate

to

previous movelrrents and protests.

In

a way, anti-austedry protests cany

on

â process that began

with

the Global Justice Movements rvhereby old, reclistributive issues cornbined

with

new ones,

in

particular those relating

to

democracy frour below. As such, Global Justice Movemetrts rnay be seen ^as precursors

of

ânti-atlsteriry protests, therefore tracing a

line of

continuity betlveen European movements. Such a corttinuiry

might

perhaps be seen, at leâst

to

some extent, ir1 the most recent wave of protests

by

the so-called CiletsJaunes Qiterally,

yeilow

vests) thar we are r,vit- nessing

in

France at

the time of

wr:iting (2018),

which

started as a fiscal protest

but

^rhen

expanded

to nore

fundarnental issues.

Many of the

issues addressed

by

these protests âre similar

to

those raised

by

artti*arrsteriry rrlovernents

*

_and

_by

Global Justice Moverlents prior

to

that

-

and perhaps the constittlencies

of

these movements and protests are at least

in

^palt

also similar, but future resear-ch

lvili

need

to

speak

to

that.

At

the sarne time, one should not

Labor movements to anti-austerity protests

forget tbat diffelences also exist across these drfferent movements and plotests. Despite ^some continuiry

rnith

the actors involved as u'ell as

in

the

clitique of

global capitalism and demo- cratic deficits inherited

from

Global Justice Movernents, arrti-arlsteriry rrlovenlents tend to {eailfie

l

^stronger

^{focus on} the nation

state as

both a

târget

âlld

a focus

of

rnobilization (FlesheL FornirraYa' 20

l7)'

European social movements between continuity and change

,Nothing is

1ost,

nothing is

created, everything

is

transforrred':

this quote âtûiblrted

to French chemist

Àntoine

Lavoisier

to

epitomize his

law of

conservation of mass can be seen to snrurrarize the ^leitmotiJ of our brief account of some

of

the key recent strands of European social movenrents. 'We _have

tried to

show that the historical trajectory

of

these movements was clraracterized

by both continuity

and change (see Flesher Foninaya

& Cox,

2013

for

a stnrilat

attelrpt to find

linkages betrveen Eulopean movenents

of the

past decades). On the one hand, each rnovement

or

movement

family

r-ests

upon

a specific

type of

cleavage and therefore ^expresses a specific conflict

line

and (class) opposition. Furthennore, each has

its own specific features, such as

the

use

of

strong embeddedness

in

the interest-mediation sysreln or the use of the strike as a privileged

fomr of

action for labor movements, the focus on hfestyle ^issues and politics

for

the nerv social movements, the scale shift fi-om the national

to the

transnational

level and the

relevance

of

panicipative-deLiberative dernocracy for Global Justice Movements, and the focus on bringrng capitalism and questions

of

inequaLiry back

into

the stucly

of

contentious politics

for

anti-ar.rsteriry movements.

We

also pointed

to a

different degree

of

homogeneity and

of

'movementness'

fol

the labor. new, global .1ustice, and anti-austerity movements.

While

any

kind of

movement can be seen to have some degree of heterogeneity (Giugrri and Grasso, 2019),

tt

rnould seem that labor movements were more homogeneous

in

temrs of

their

social bases as

well

as the issues thev addlessed relative

both to new

social movernents and Giobal Justice Moverrents. The situation of anti-auster-ity lîovements is less clear-cut as

it

brings together

both old

and new issues, but at the sarne

time,

as their name suggests, they focr"rs on the stnlggle against auster-

i[y

measur-es and poLicies. As sr-rch, some have also questioned u'hether anti-arlstenty protests ate based

on

a cohesive moverrrent as

would

be understood through a comrrron definition adopted by many social movement scholars-

On _the othel hand, alongside these elements

of

change, we also observe continuity. Apaft from the

big

tr-ansfonrration

in

the repertoires

of

contention

-

^{fr-otn a local,} patronized and reâctive tladitional repertoile to the national, âr-ltonomous and proactive modeln repertoire

-

so well described

by Tilly

(1986, 1995), other changes characterize

the

historical develop- ment

of

social movements: as

new

cleavages

and conflict

lines emerge, ne\

/

issues arise, other social groups and sectors

of

society enter

the

protest

field,

nerv gener?tions becorne nrobilized, new folms

of

organizations are experimented with., new forms

of

action are put to.use, atrd so

forth.

Organizational action forrns, however, can then

be'handed down'to

other contentious

g'oups.

Thus,

the

horizontal, pal-ricipâtoly fomrs

of

organization

intlo-

ouced during the 1968 protest \r/ave cân be seen

to

have then been borrowed

by

new social movelnents and latel

by

Global Justice Movements, and also employed dudng anti-austerity protests. Similarly,

'cultural'forms of

action consisting

in

the combination of political ^protest

'"ÀÀrh.more visual'shows,'such _{as street theateï,} were brought

to

the fore

by

sti'ands

of

new ùocral moveulents

-

^{and even} here, one could

find

some resemblances

with the

chariuari

of

the

,Ancien Rigirrre used

to

address a reprirnand

to the

individuals ^deerned

guilry of

having oroken

collectlve rules

(TiUy,

l9g6).

Marco Giugni and Maria Crasso

Continuiry

may _{also, and} per-haps above

all,

be obserwed

in the

issues addressed

by

the different movements. Some scholar.s have pointed

long

ago

to

the fact that the issues _raised

by

the

new

social movements were

not

novel per se.

Qtite

the contrary, these movelrents had their precursors at the end

of the

19th centr-lry, although those ^issnes then haci not _been politicized

to

the sâ1xe extent as they later r,vere afteL

the

1968 protest wave (Brand, 1990).

Moreover, some issues

do

conre and go. As

we

have

tried to

illustrate,

'old,'

redistributive issues rypically addressed

by labor

nlovements

were given lower priority by new

social nrovements, r,vhich mostly _focused

on

cultural issries relating

to

lifestyle and

wider

nroral causes. Global Justice Movements and above all anti-austeriry protests, horvever, can be seen

to

have

brought them

back

into the field of

contention

in the

2000s,

at

leasr

in

some respects.

Finaily, we wish to note how while each rnovement has its own constituency based on the specific cleavage upon which

it

rests, those involved

in

different movements may not always be quite so distinct. This may suggest,

in

a more speculative fashion and ibllorving Eggert _and

Giugni

(2012,2015), that a process

of

hornogenization

of

the structural bases

of

the rnove- ments of the Left, bringing old and new movements closer-

to

each other, mây have occurred

in

more recent yeârs.

In

other r,vords, the social bases of oid and new movements

- ⁱⁿ

^{terms of}

social background as

weil

as

in

teryns of value orientations

-

^{can be seen to} have become less

pronouncecl than before. While this

process

would have been made

possible b1'

a transformation

of the

cleavage structr-lres

in

Europe and

of

the political space, the rise

of

GlobalJustice Movements and

in

part also of anti-austerity protests coulcl have contributed to the bridging

of

the gap berween the structural and cultural location

of

participants

in

new social movements

-

environnental, peace, women, gay and lesbian, and so forth

-

^{on the one}

hand, and that of old social movements

-

particularly labor movements

-

^{on the} other. This.

in

turn, could be seen to be due to

-

^{and to a} varying degree clepending on the strength ofthe

class cieavage

- a'colonization'by

the new sociai movement constituencies of issues tradition- ally addressed by other social ciasses and movements. This argument remains speculative at this

junctule.

_FIowever,

it

does open up avenues

for

exploration on the affinities bewveen move- rnents or movement famiLies that have ernerged in Europe

in

further research.

References

Âncelovici, M., Duôur, P., & Nez, H. (eds.) (2016). Street Politics in tlrc Age o;f Austetity: Fron the Indigna- dos to Occtlpy. Amsterdam; Amsterdarn University Press.

Andretta

M.

^(2017). Neoliberalism and Its Drscontents

in

Italy: Protests'Without Movement? in l)ella Porta, D., Anclretta, M., Fernandes, T., O'Connor, F., Romanos, 8., & Vogiatzoglou, M. (eds.) I-rtte Neoliberulkm antl its Discontents in tlrc Econontic Crisis: Cornparitq Social Mouentents in. the European Petiph.' ery. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 201.-241..

Berrneo, N.,

&

Bartels, L.

M.

^(2014). Mass Politics in Tough Times. In Bermeo,

N. &

^Bartels, L. M.

(eds.), &Iar: Politirs in Tough T'inrcs: Opinions, I"otes and Protest in the Cteat Recessiort. O>,-tord: Oxforcl Universiry Press, 1-39.

Brand,

K.-W.

(1990). Cyclical Aspects of New Social Movements: Waves of Cultural Criticism and Mobilization Cycles of New Middle-Class Radicalism. hr Dalton, R. J. & Kuechler,

M.

(eds.), Clral- lenging the Politiml Order: Neu, Sodal and PoliticaL Nlttuentents

in

l,Vestetn Dettrouades. Oxford: ^O>ford Universiry- P ress, 24 - 42.

Calhoun, Craig (1993). 'New Social Movements'of the Early Nineteenrh Century. Sodal Science History, 17(3): 385-427.

Castells, M. (2012). Nettporks o;f Outrage and Hopc: Social Mouenrents in the Internet Age. Cambridge: Poliry.

Cina11i, M.,

&

Giugni,

M.

(2016) Collective Responses to the Economic Crisis i1 the Public Domain:

Myth or Realiry? Politks & Polity, 44(3): 427-446.

Labor movements to anti-austerity ^protests

Cohrr, S. (1993). ^lUhcn Strikcs A4ake Sensc

- Atd

^Wh1,: Ltssonsfton'I'hird Republic Frettch Coal Mitærs.

Nerv York: ^Plelruul

Cotgrove. ^S., & DLrff. A. (1980). Errvironmenralisrn, A4iddle-C1ass Radicalisrn and Politics. The Soriological Rct,iert', 28(2): 33J*35 I

D:rlton,

R.,

^Kuechler.

M., &

Burklin,

W.

(1990). The Challenge

of

New Social Moveuents. Lr f):rlron,

R. &

Kuechler',

M.

(eds.), Challenging tlrc Political Orrler. Nevv York: Oxfold lJniversiry

Press, 3-20

Della Polta,

D.

(2005a). Making the Polis: Social Fomms aud Detnocracy

in

the Globa1 Jtatice Movelnent. A4obilizatiort, 10(1): 73-94.

Della Porta,

D.

(2005b). 'fhe _{Sotial Bascs of tlrc Global}

Justïce Mtwernent: Sonre I-lrcoretical ReJlections and Entpirical Euidenrc.fiom the First European. Sttcial Forum. Programure on Civil Sociecy and Social Move-

11ents, Pâper No. 21' Geneva: UNRISD.

Della Porra,

D.

^(2007a). The GlobalJustice Movement: An Inti'oduction. In Della ^Porta,

D.

(ed.), The GlobalJustice Mouenrctû: Cross-Nation.al and Tranyational Pcrspectiues. Boulder, CO: Paradigrn, 1-28.

Della Porra,

D.

(ed.) (2007b). Thc Clobal Justice \4ouenrcnt: Cross-National dild Trcnsflatioî'Ial Perspeuiues.

Doulder. CO: Paradignr'

l)ella ^Porta,

D.

(ed.) (2009). Anofhct Europe: Conccptions and Practices of Dentocracy în tlrc European Social Forurns. London: Routledge

Della Porta, D. (2015). Social Mouenents ir. Tintes qf Austerity: Bringing Capitalisn Back Into Protest Analysis.

Canbridge: ^PolirY.

Della Porta, D., Andretta,

M.,

Mosca, L.,

&

Reiter,

H.

(2006). Clobalization _-fVonr Belotu: Transttational.

Artiuists and Prtttest Neh.t,otl<s. Minneapolis, MN: Universiry of Minnesota Press.

Della Porta, D., & Diani,

M.

(2006 [1999]). ^Social Mouenents: An Introduttion. 2nd edition. Oxfor-d: Basil Blackrvell

Della Porra, D., Kriesi, H., & Rucht, D. (eds.) ('1999). Social Mouenrcnts in a Globalizing World. London:

Macnull.rlr.

Della Porta,

D., &

Mattoru,

A.

(201,4). Spreadirg Protests

itt

Social X4ouenarûs of the Ctisk. Colchester:

ECPR Press.

Della Porta, D., & Rucht, D. (eds.) (201,3). Mcating Darnrrury: Potper antl f)eliberation. in Global.Justice l\4ote- nrcnts. Canbidee: Cambridge University Press.

Della Porta,

D., &

Tan'ow, S. ^(eds.) (2005). Transnational Protest and Global Actûrisn. Lanham, MD:

Rowrnan and Littlefield.

Diani, Mario. (2015). The Cement of Ciuil Sodety: Sudying Netporks

ir

Loulities. Cambridge: Cambridge Universiry Press.

Dupis-Déri, F. (2007). Les Black Blacs: La Liberté et l'égalité se nanfestent. Montréal: Lux Editeur.

Eder,

K.

(1985). The 'Nerv' Social Movernents: Moral Cmsades, Political Pressure Groups, or Social Movernents? Sociological Research, 52: 869-901.

Eder.

K.

(1993). Tlrc Neu, Politirs of Class: Social Mouanents and Ciltwal D),nanics in Aduanred Sodcties.

Londou Sage.

Eggert,

N., &

Giugni,

M.

^(201.2).

The

Homogenization

of

'O1d' and

'New'

Social Movernents:

A Cornparison of Participants in May Day ^and Climate Change Deuronstratious. )tlobilization, 17(3):

33s-348.

Eggert, N., & Giugni, M. (2015). Does the Class Cleavage Sti1l Matter? T'he Social Composition of Parti- cipants

in

Demonstrations Adciressing Redistrjbutive and Cultulal ^Issues

in

Three Countries. lnter

_

^nariottal SodoloBy.3tt(l): 2 l*38.

l'antasia, R., & Stepan-Norris,J. (2004). The Labor Movementin Motion. In Snow,

D.4.,

Soule, S. &

-

^{Knesi, H.} (eds.), Thc Blad<tyell Conrpanion to Social Monnterts. Oxforcl: Blackweil, 555-575.

Feenstrâ. R., Tonney, S., Casero-Rrpollés, 4., & Keane, J. ^{(eds.) (2017).} Refgtrring Dentocracy: Tlrc Span-

*...tsh Politiral l-nborarory. Lordon: Rourledge.

Fillicule, O., Blanchari, P.. Agrikolianski, E., Bandler, M., Passy, F., & Sormlier,

i.

(2005). L'altennolr- dlalisnte en réseaux. Trajectoir.es nrilitantes, multipositionnalité et lonnes de 1'etrgagement: Les partici-

-,

^?tn,, du corrrte-sornrnet du CB d'Evian. Po1irir., 68: .l 3-48.

nlttl.t

Fou,i,r"ya, C. (2007). Auronomous Movernents and the Institutional Left: Trvo Approaches in

",

Tension in Mach'rd's And-globalizarion Nenvork. Soutlr Etuopean Society

t

^Politics, 12(3): 335-358.

""tltt

Fotltinayr, C. (2017). European Anri-austelity and Pro-democracy Protests

in

the-Wake of the Clobai Finarrcial Cisis. Sorlal,1 kiuentertt Snttlies, 16(1):

710.

Marco Ciugni and Maria Grasso

Flesher Fominaya, C., & Cox, L. (ecls.) (2013). Untlerstanding E*ropean Mouenents: New Social lulouements, Clobal Ju*ite ^Stntgles, Anti-Austerity ^protest. London: Rourledge.

Flesher Fominaya,

C., &

Hayes,

G.

(2017). Special Issue: Resisting Austeriry: Collective Action in Europe in the Wake of the Global Finaqcial C1rsis. Sodal Mouenent Swdies, L6(1): 1-151..

Gamson, \V. 4., & Siûy, M. L. (2013). The #Occupy Movement: An Introcluction. ^The SociologicaL euar- terly,54(2): 159-163.

Giugni,

M.

(2001). Modem Protest Politics. In Sreams, P. ^(ed.), Encydopedia of Er*opean Social History.

Ner.v York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 3j,1,-331.

Giugni, M., Bancller, M., & Eggert, N. (2006). The ClobalJrstice Mouenent: Hotu Far Does the Classic Social Mouentent Agenda Co in Explaining Trunsnational Coyttention? Geneva: Programrne Paper, UNRISD.

Gitrgni, M., & Grasso, M. (eds.) (2015). Austerity and Prctest: Popular Contention in Tinrcs of Etonontic Crisis.

London: Routledge.

Giugni, M.

&

Grasso,

M.

(2019). Street Citizerc: Protest Politks and Social Mouenrent Actiuism in tl.te Age o.f Clobalization. Cambridge: Cambridge Universiry Press.

Grasso, M.T.

&

Giugni, M. (2016a). Protest Participation ancl Economic Crisis: The ConditioningRole of Political Opportunities. European Joumal of ^{Political Research} (Open Acces). Retrieved ftom: cloi:

10.1 1 1 I / ¹ 47 5 -67 65.121.53 (accessed 1 0 October 20 1 9).

Grasso, M.T. and Giugni,

M.

(2016b). Do issnes Matrer? Anri-Ausrerity Protests' Composition, Values, ancl Action Repertoires Compared. Research

in

Social. lVlouentents, Confiicts and Change, 39: 31-58.

Retrieved from:http //www.emeraldinsighr.com/doi/abs/10.1108/S0163-786X20160000039002

(accessed 1 1 October 201 9).

Gnsfield, J. (994). The

Refleivity

of New Social Movements: Collective Behavior and Mass Sociecy

Theory Revisited. In Laraila, E.,Johnston, H. & Gusfieid,J. (eds.), Netu Social ]tlouements: From ldeol- ogy to Llentity. Philadelphia, PA: Temple Universiry Press, 58-78.

Hetland, G.,

&

Goodwin,

l.

Q013). The ^Strange Disappearance of Capital-isrn lrom Social Movemenr Studies,

in

Barker, C., Cox, L., Krinsky, J.,

&

Nilsen, A.G. (eds.), Àtlarxism and Sotial Mouentents.

Leiden: Brill, 83-102.

Inglehart,

k.

(1"977). The Silent Reuolutiot'r: Changiug Vahæs and Political Styles anong Western Publics.

Princeton, NJ: Princeton (Jniversiry Press.

Juris, J. ^(2007). Nettuorking Fufitres: The fuIouenrents against Corysotate Clobalizatiott. Durham,

NC:

Duke Universiry Press.

Kaldor, M., & Selchow, S. (2013). The 'Bubbling Up' of Subterranean Politics in Europe.Jor.rrnal of Ciuil S.rriety, 9( l): 78-99.

Katsiaficas, G. (2007 ï19971). T'ln Subuersion of Politics: European Autonontous Mouenents and the Decolontza- tion o;f Eueryday L1te. New edition. Chico, CA: AK Press.

Katzenstein,

M., &

McChirg Mu11er, C. (eds.) (1987). The Wornen's fuIouenents of the Llnited States and Westem Europe. Philadelphia, PA: Temple Universiry Press.

Kitschelt, H. (1989). The Logics of Party .Fornntion: Ecological. Politics in Belgiwr and West Gennan.y. Ithaca, NY: Cornell lJniversiry Pless.

Kriesi, H. (1989). New Social Movements and the Ner,v Class in the Netherlantls. AnrericanJoLûndl 0_f Sod- ology, 9 4 (5) : 1 07 8-I1 16.

Kriesi,

H.

(2004). Polirical Context and Opportuniry. In Snow, D., Soule, S. ct Kriesi,

H.

^{(eds.), Tfue}

Blacktuell Contpanion. to Social Mouenenrs. Oxford: Blacki.vell, 67-90.

Kriesi, H., Koopmans, R., Duyvendak, J. W.,

&

Giugni,

M.

^(1995). Netp Sodal Movenrcnts in. ,Vesteftt Europe. Minneapolis, MN: Universiry ofMinnesota Press.

Krugman, P. (2012). End this Depression Nour/ New York: W. W. Norton & Company.

Maeckelbergh,

M.

E. (2009). ^'I'he Will ^of the NIany: Hotu the Abergloltalization Nlouenrent Is Changing ^the Face of Democracy. London: Pluto Ptess.

McAdarn, D., Tarrow, S., & Tilly, C. (2001). Dynanics of ContantiotL. Cambridge: Cambridge university

Press.

Melucci, A. (1994). A Strange Find of Newness: What's New in New Social Movements. In ^{Laraiia, E.,} Johnston,

H. &

Gusfielcl, J. (eds.), Netu Sotial Mouements: From Ideology to ldentity. Philadelphia, ^PA;

Temple University Pres, 101-130.

Meyer, D. S. (2004). Protesr and Political Opportunities. Attnrrcl Reuieut of Sociology, 30: 125-145.

Olfe, C. ^(1985). New Social Movernents: Challenging the Boundaries of instituriona.l Politics Sociological Researrlq 52: 817-868.

Pichardo, N. A. (1997). New Social Movements: A Critical keview Annual Reuicu, of Sociology,23: 411-430.

1

' j j i i

t1

.: i

1

! i I I i

!j

1

l

i

I

I

i :

lj )

1

j

; i

ll I

l l

l

a

I

1

I

1 'I

l

l :

1

Labor movements to anti-austerity protests

RLiJig. W. (J98R). Peace :rnd Ecology Movemerlrs in Wesrem Enrope. Il/est Etnopean Politits,ll:26-39.

.ho,r"r, ^E.. &

Til\'.

C. (1974). Strikcs in France 1830-1968. Cambndge: Cambridue Universiry ^Press.

i,rrith.J. ^(2{)0-1). Transnational Pt'ocesses ancl Movernents. In SIrovt',

l).,

Soule, S. & Kriesi,

I{.

(eds.), T/rc

Blatktltll Cotupaniott ro Soria/ l\,4ttuenrcnts. Oxford: Blacki','e11, 311-335.

Snrirh, J., & Johnston.

ll.

(eds.) (2(\()2). Ctot:ali:ation and Rcsistanrc: 'Trunvntional Dimensions of Social .\Iulcrrr, rrlr. L.ttthattt. MD: Rorvrrran antl I itrlelield.

Stislitz. J. E. (zlt12) ^Tlrr Prirc oJ Ineqttalitl'. Ne1i. York: Nortotr aud Co.

T.r"ro..,, S.

(l{l0i).

f 'ra;rsnatioual Politics: Colrtentiorl and Institutions

itr

Intetlatiotvtl Politics Anttr.ral Rcviep ^of Politirol Sdurce' 4: 1'-20.

Tarros,, ^S. (2005). Tltc Nep Transndtittnal Conterftiort. Cambridge: Carrbliclge lJniversicy Press.

Tarrou,, ^S., & Della Porta, D. (2005). Conchrsion: 'Globalization,' C)omplex Intemationalisur, atrd Tlans- rjatiolrâl Contention. hr Della Porta, D- & llan-ou', S. (ecis.), 'l-ranstutionrtl Ptotest atld Cloltal A1iuism.

Larrlranr, MD: Ilot'man ancl Little{ield, 227-246.

Ti[y. ^{C. (1986).} T/re Contentiotrs French:Four Centrties o-f Popilrrr Stng{e. Canrbndge, MA: Belknap Pless.

Trlly,

C.

^{(1995). Popilar} Contcnîiort

h

Craat Britain, '1758-18-34. Cambridge, MA: I{arvard Universit}'

Press.

141