Social Movements and the Thymos
“We ‘join social movements’ because we are members of the human race. The human race is filled with passion. ‘Money and materialism, technological development, and sophisticated consumer demands,’ are understandable pursuits and necessary to sustain life. But the ‘struggle for victory, recognition, and meaning,’ these are what we live for.” — Adapted from Dead Poets Society ‘Understanding Poetry’.
Introduction
On May Fourth, 1919, in China, student-led liberation acts aroused and increased awareness regarding imperialist aggression and bolstered their determination to resist. Throughout the past century, the flair of rationality and the pursuit of individuality grew more pronounced: activists advocated the use of literature and poetry to expose social injustices and suffering, healing and cultivating a national identity that embraces individual expression. Meanwhile, the ideas of revolutionary martyrs known as the May Forth spirit persist and serve as a continued source of inspiration. If the May Forth movement and its spirit may represent the true social movements, then social movements and activists, like passionate poems and poets, are not driven solely by external validation or predefined notions of success. Instead, they embrace such an inherent spirit to make meaningful impacts, instigate change, and contribute to the ongoing evolution of society. It is not the metrics and success criteria that define social movements, it is their ability to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield; to not only engrave one’s identity but also propel history forward.
Tolstoy aptly expresses this idea: “History is the product of vast, amorphous, and indecipherable social movements”. [1] Social movement should also not be uniformized into independent characteristics; rather, the dynamics of a social movement should be seen as a holistic interplay between the movement itself and its environment, forming a field of reactions and reconfigurations. [2] Contextualized within their broader field, each movement becomes a contender seeking to induce change within the socio-political-economical order. [3] With this, mainstream models are examined, highlighting the limitations of an outcome-based dichotomy. Subsequently, dialectics and Plato’s tripartite-soul-theory are utilized to transcend traditional evaluative frameworks, thus contemplating the essence of social movements beyond criteria and standards, processes and outcomes, and success and failure.
Why the success-failure dichotomy does not work
The prevailing approach to assessing social movements categorizes them as successful or unsuccessful based on their effectiveness. Many scholars, including Gamson, Turner & Killian, adopt a perspective that prioritizes immediate, visible political outcomes, narrowing into a binary understanding of success and failure, [4] [5] overlooking the gradual and immeasurable process of ideological transformation.
However, social movements bring about ideological transformations despite their political incompetencies. The Fennoman movement, which may exemplify success, took centuries to elevate the status of the Finnish language to official recognition in Finland. [6] This success encompasses not only the movement’s impact on official decrees but also its influence on Finnish speakers, cultural reinforcement, and nationalist sentiments. In contrast, the French Revolution, despite falling short of the envisioned order outlined in the Declaration of Human Rights and subsequent rights curtailment under Napoleon, cannot be easily dismissed as a failure. Vladimir Lenin, leader of the Russian Revolution, remarked, “Take the great French Revolution. It is with good reason that it is called a great revolution”. [7] Indeed, despite institutional shortcomings and bloodshed, Russia’s socialist revolution (also May Forth) drew inspiration from equality, liberalism, communism, and fraternity established during the French Revolution. The following thus challenges the dichotomy from two perspectives: consequentialism and the binary framework of success and failure.
Consequentialism fails to consider the dynamics of change within social movements and the three interconnected sources that contribute to variations in their socio-political order. [8] These sources of change can be categorized:
1. Crises: Turbulent circumstances resulting from external factors that create fertile ground for social movements.
2. State/Institutional Structure: The characteristics of the political regime, the basis of legitimacy (legality), and the socio-political and economic order.
3. Ideology: The identity of participants, strategies employed, and collective identity.
First, the role of crises is overlooked. Movements often emerge during times of crisis, where contextual factors greatly influence their effectiveness. By applying Durkheim’s theory of suicide, it can be argued that every social movement inherently achieves success as they manifest structural issues, social unrest, and deep-rooted discontent within institutions. [9] Revolutions triggered during times of upheaval, such as the Russian Revolution, highlight the propulsive role of social movements in driving social change. Consequentialism overlooks the fluid nature of crises, and social movements can be subsumed within a critique of the time. [10] In other words, consequentialism itself focuses on social change prompted by crises and fails to fully capture the value and significance of social movements.
Second, the dichotomy also neglects the structure of the state/institution. Social movements operate within structured path-dependency mechanisms, where the same movement can yield different outcomes based on varying structures. For instance, political movements are more likely to succeed in democracies with decentralized power structures and competitive political parties, while they face challenges in societies with highly centralized power structures or flawed electoral dynamics. [11] The LGBTQ movement finds greater strength and influence within the democratic framework of the United States while facing obstacles in regions like China with different underlying structures. [12] Labeling the same social movement as successful or unsuccessful based on geopolitical disparity becomes consequentialist, focusing solely on consequences dictated by the structure, disregarding less overt ideological changes, like increased LGBTQ awareness.
Third, social movements typically follow a gradual and cumulative trajectory toward eventual success associated with ideology. The process of ideological change occurs through continuous innovation, negotiation, and conflict. [13] Success is not immediate but rather builds up from rags to riches. For example, the American Revolution experienced significant battles before achieving freedom for the United States. Participants in social movements engage in communication, exchanging and adapting ideas, rhetoric, and modes of action. [14] Transformed ideologies spread and inspire subsequent movements, such as the Haiti Revolution and the Irish Revolution. The holistic understanding of social movements spoken of should include not only the surroundings of the movement, but should also consider ideologies as well.
The existing dichotomy lacks consideration of factors such as the timing of crises, the influence of structural elements, and the role of ideology. Consequentialism fails to account for the intricate ideological changes; the binary assessment of success oversimplifies achievements, treating them as one-dimensional and static rather than recognizing their cumulative and evolving nature. Given “vast, amorphous, and indistinguishable”, whether it is feasible to categorize social movements as successful or unsuccessful is questionable.
Reimagining the Meaning of Social Movement
This essay challenges the rigid binary assessment with a dialectical approach and considers them as existing in a dynamic tension between success and unsuccess hinted at with social “movement”: The dynamic pursuit of ideals, the search for a personal and collective purpose, and the ability to adapt to change. These factors differentiate the dynamic historical progress we experience today from a static, saturated state.
In an idealized world described by Fukuyama as “the end of history,” where liberal democracy prevails, progress is stagnated. Fukuyama characterizes the end of history as a “sad time” when the previous global ideological struggle is replaced by economic calculations, technical problem-solving, environmental concerns, and the fulfillment of consumer demands. [15] This concept draws on Hegel’s notion of history as a coherent evolutionary process, and the end of history signifies a final stage where further evolution ceases. Within this evolutionary process, the thesis of not-failure and its antithesis of not-success in social movements become compatible and transcend the binary dichotomy, leading to a synthesis that advances both the individual and history. Eventually, this synthesis evolves into a new thesis and triggers its antithesis. This momentum, supported by Tolsky, suggests that social movements possess the capacity to propel historical progress, embodying a multitude of characteristics.
A humanistic approach to comprehending social movements should encompass both a comprehensive theory of historical progression and individual concerns. Hegel argued that individuals have a fundamental need to be acknowledged as “human beings by others” and that the essence of being human lies in the pursuit of worth and dignity through striving and seeking recognition. [16] Therefore, when the “struggle for recognition” is emphasized as being lost at the end of history, it is recognition, or the pursuit of prestige, [17] that truly underlies social movements. This aligns with Plato’s division of the psyche into Reason, Thymos (the desire for recognition), and Desire. [18] The underpinnings of a social movement are now clear: driven by the hope for victory, recognition, and respect, it is the Thymos that embodies the reasons why we live and the ideals we live for.
This discussion on Thymos sheds light on why history has evolved, how social movements transcend the dichotomy, and why the end of history is a “sad time” devoid of social movement impetus, leading to endless boredom. This sense of boredom arises from the banality and jejune of a repetitive and rational consumeristic life, which reduces everyone at the end of history to mere passive individuals preoccupied with material comfort and the gratification of statistical reasoning. The concept of the “last man” and Camus’ analogy of Sisyphus underscore the inherent hollowness and tedium that can emerge in a society lacking meaningful challenges and purpose. [19] In such a world, individuals can find themselves yearning for, as Tolstoy expressed: “a desire for desires”. [20] This desire stems from a longing for what is most lacking at the end of history: the audacity and self-improvement that can be seized from the adventure of change.
Social movements, fueled by Thymos, offer an antidote to this sense of boredom and provide individuals with the opportunity to rebel against meaninglessness and cultivate their audacity and self-improvement. By engaging in social movements, individuals can sustain their personal struggles, find fulfillment in collective beliefs, and strive for recognition and justice. [21] This is because social movements are ultimately driven by individuals who have been silenced by the powerful, and any progress, including the mere exposure of injustice when a group is denied the dignity it deserves, empowers people more than anything else. This empowerment of individuals extends beyond the satisfaction of their own needs or the rational pursuit of self-interest; it becomes the embodiment of Thymos: the desire to be recognized, and to recognize others in the face of absurdity and ennui.
From this perspective, social movements become symbolic and function on a grand historical and personal basis, the outcome of which may simply be a by-product, carrying an eternal spirit of recognition and progress whose significance sustains even when history comes to an end. Despite the advent of an era defined by progress, social movements operating in a positive feedback loop, [22] would have feelings of ennui and nostalgia giving birth to fresh surges and desires that transcend mere contentment and consumerism. The thymotic element of human nature manifested in social movements can ignite action in a comfortable world where most material desires are satisfied, yet the recognition of our own worth and the worth of others remains unfulfilled. Thus, even within an Iron Cage framework, [23] social movements will invariably embody Thymos and fulfill their intrinsic purpose: adapting, evolving history, and making humans more human.
This essay concludes with one poem:
In the realm of social movements, we unite as one,
Bound by our shared humanity, an eternal bond undone.
While we foresee history’s dawn to arise,
More to history than meets the eye.
Money and material allure, technology’s embrace,
These earthly quests, essential in life’s intricate chase.
Yet deeper still, our hearts aspire to soar,
Get Cynosure’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
Yearning for triumph’s touch, the respect we adore.
In social movements, our voices intertwine,
Resounding with hope, a chorus divine.
For it is not mere sustenance that fuels our breath,
But the sweet scent of kudos, the embrace of honor’s wreath.
In this grand tapestry, we find purpose and worth,
Transcending mere existence, reaching beyond May Forth.
For in the quest for recognition, in life’s great dance,
We discover the essence of our shared human romance.
2023/5/4
Endnotes
1. Leo Tolstoy. (n.d.). AZQuotes.com. Retrieved June 22, 2023, from AZQuotes.com
2. Diani, M. (1992) ‘The Concept of Social Movement’, The Sociological Review 40(1), pp. 1–25.
3. Haiven, Max, and Alex Khasnabish. 2013. “Between Success and Failure: Dwelling with Social Movements in the Hiatus.” Interface: A Journal for and about Social Movements 5 (2): 472–98.
4. Saeed, Raza. (2009). Conceptualizing success and failure for social movements.
5. Trevizo, D. (2006). Between Zapata and Che: A Comparison of Social Movement Success and Failure in Mexico. Social Science History, 30(2), 197–229.
6. Alapuro, R. (1979). Nineteenth century nationalism in Finland: a comparative perspective. Scandinavian Political Studies, 2(1), 19–29.
7. Cranston, M. (1989). The French Revolution in the Minds of Men. The Wilson Quarterly (1976-), 13(3), 46–55.
8. Zhao Dingxin. (2006). Lecture Notes on Social and Political Movements. Social Science Literature Press. pp.10–23
9. Mueller, A. S., Abrutyn, S., Pescosolido, B., & Diefendorf, S. (2021). The Social Roots of Suicide: Theorizing How the External Social World Matters to Suicide and Suicide Prevention. Frontiers in psychology, 12, 621569.
10. Diamond, J. (2020). Upheaval: Turning Points for Nations in Crisis. Back Bay Books.
11. Useem, B., Goldstone, J.A. The paradox of victory: social movement fields, adverse outcomes, and social movement success. Theory Soc 51, 31–60 (2022).
12. BERNSTEIN, M. (2003). NOTHING VENTURED, NOTHING GAINED? CONCEPTUALIZING SOCIAL MOVEMENT “SUCCESS” IN THE LESBIAN AND GAY MOVEMENT. Sociological Perspectives, 46(3), 353–379.
13. Saeed, Raza. (2009). Conceptualizing success and failure for social movements.
14. Polletta, F. and Jasper, J. M. (2001) ‘Collective Identity and Social Movements’, Annual Review of Sociology 27, pp. 283–305
15. Fukuyama, F. (2012). The end of history and the last man. Penguin Books., 62–6
16. Roberts, R. H. (2002). Religion, theology and the human sciences (№172). Cambridge University Press.
17. JONES, N. H. (1993). [Review of The End of History and the Last Man, by F. Fukuyama]. Medicine and War, 9(2), 159–161. http://www.jstor.org/stable/45354744
18. Jorgenson, C. (2018). Thymos. In The Embodied Soul in Plato’s Later Thought (Cambridge Classical Studies, pp. 6–38). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781316795651.003
19. Roberts, R. H. (2002). Religion, theology and the human sciences (№172). Cambridge University Press.
20. Camus, Albert. The Myth of Sisyphus. Éditions Gallimard, 1942.
21. Storm, M. (2020, September 4). Reading notes (2020, week 36) — on boredom (“a desire for desires”), how to cope with radical…
22. Walter Lippmann: Preface to Politics: 9: Revolution and Culture. (n.d.). Brocku.ca.
23. Weber, M. (2013). The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Routledge., pp.62
