How do individual decisions influence the success of collective action?

    For this blog post, I chose to read “Collective Identity and Social Movements” by Francesca Polletta and James M. Jasper. In their piece, Polletta and Jasper argue that the term “collective identity” has been asked to do too much in the scholarly community. They seek to examine additional questions related to the term “collective identity” to inquire as to whether collective identity is a cause for, or product of, social movements and to study the broader relationship between collective identity, individual experience, and social engagement. The authors conclude that “structural interests are often recent in origin; that we may engage in moral protest to develop the kind of self we want; that what is considered a good strategy is often based on what groups it is symbolically associated with, and that movements promote new identities as a way to gain power as well as transform selves.”

I think that individual decisions influence the success of collective action in a few key ways. First, it is clear that movements require participants, usually many active participants, to succeed in attaining their objectives or having their demands met by the holders of social and political power. Individual decisions to associate with a larger identity group and participate in such protest events are critical to the success of social movements. There is an interesting question as to how much people “choose” to be a part of a larger identity group, or how much they are forced to be a part of a given collective identity by social restrictions, but either way, strong associations with such a group are foundational to the success of collective action. Second, the choice to present the chosen identity in a given way is closely tied to the success of collective action, as noted by Polletta and Jasper’s discussion of protest strategy. Individual choices to use, strengthen, or create identities for the purpose of social movements can have a strong impact on the outcome of the movement. If potential participants do not feel a strong desire to “activate” their identity, or supposed identity, the movement is likely to fail as it will lack large numbers and retain few motivated participants. I like that Polletta and Jasper discuss the ways in which identity can emerge as almost a byproduct of social engagement. In this sense, identity and representation as tied to collective action may not be an individual choice or a causal factor, but rather more of a group decision that gives birth to new social classifications.

I think that this article is a nice example of scholars clearly outlining gaps in previous literature and then succinctly exploring questions those gaps have left unaddressed. I hadn’t previously considered the ways in which identity can be an “outcome” of a social movement. Traditionally, I tend to think of identities as pre-existing, but clearly, this is not always the case. This article connects to our discussions of political salience, as history shows that the political salience of groups, and the very existence or perceived existence of those groups, can change drastically over time.