Social skill is defined as “the capacity for inter-subjective thought and action that shapes the provision of meaning, interests and identity in the service of collective ends” [Fligstein & McAdam, 2012 p.4] Fligstein, N. & McAdam, D. 2012, A Theory of Fields, Oxford University Press, New York, New York. Hat-tip to Stephen McGrail
2019: How the #climate activists blew it, again #debacle #doomed
Imagine it's 2019. Imagine that "climate activists" get the perfect conditions handed to them on a plate. What would happen? Sometimes Mother Nature gives climate change activists a boost. She tried in the summer of 1988. She tried again in August 2005, when Hurricane Katrina bulls-eyed New Orleans. She tried again in the long... Continue Reading →
On anxiety, social class and who feels comfortable at “top-down” meetings
On anxiety, social class and who feels comfortable at "top-down" meetings Published on 15 Dec 2013 Some not quite fully thought through speculations. As well as social class, of course, there's gender, ethnicity, age, ideology to put into the mix. But as an initial stab at answering the question "why are people content to continue... Continue Reading →
“Entrench warfare” or “why I don’t bother with one-off trainings” #smugosphere #inertia
A few years ago I organised a one-off training session on research for activists. It went well and had ... no discernible impact on how anyone did anything. So it goes. I reflected on this - and other training I have been part of as a punter. And I came to the conclusion that unless... Continue Reading →
Resources – tangible and intangible
“Resources can be tangible (e.g. equipment, machinery, finance, human resources) as well as intangible. Intangible resources include assets such as technological know-how, the status or reputation of an actor, its social contacts and network ties. Moreover, resources are conceptualized to be controlled not only by organizations but also by entire industries or emerging technological fields.”... Continue Reading →
Inscribed capacity described
“As Allen (1997) has shown, power can be conceptualized in a variety of ways – as an ‘inscribed capacity’, a collectively produced resource mobilized by groups to achieve particular ends, or as a mobile and diffuse phenomenon realized as a series of ‘strategies, techniques, and practices’.” (Lawhon and Murphy, 2011: 367) Who does the inscribing?... Continue Reading →
(Wind) Power to the People – Denmark, Tvind and bricolage
So, two years ago I read this Hendry, C. and Harborne, P. 2011. Changing the view of wind power development: More than “bricolage.” Research Policy 40,, pp. 778-789. and wrote this about it - This was mentioned in a reading group/symposium yesterday by one of my supervisors. It’s a response/elaboration to a paper by Garud and... Continue Reading →
Bloody compassion and the bloody smugosphere
We talk about “carbon capital”, “fossil fuel historical bloc”, ‘technological lock-in’. Yep, them corporations and states sure are sclerotic, ain't they? But, aside from talking about foundations and how NGOs take their money and sell a fake rebellion, we don’t talk about social movement hegemonies and blocks or ‘social lock-in’. This bores me. Descriptions of how... Continue Reading →
Crash test dummies and movement building
Do you ever feel you're strapped into a car that almost deliberately, wilfully, crashes into a wall? Sort of a Groundhog Day/Source Code mash-up, with Camus ruefully driving a Facel Vega and getting hit by a boulder that some clown had let roll down a hill? I do. It's like we in the 'social movement... Continue Reading →
The costs of collusion with activist bullshit and hype cycles
When a Shiny New Technology is being hyped, it's in order to pump the stock up, or get venture capital. That's how the hype cycle game is played, and it happens among mostly consenting adults. Fair enough you might say. No hype and nothing gets done (maybe). But when it comes to social movement hype... Continue Reading →
marchudson.net 