Social Movements Prefiguring Political Theory

Author:

Wathne Sophia

Abstract

AbstractAdding to the growing literature on social movements as knowledge and theory creators, this chapter wants more social movement research to focus on the content of the political theories created by social movements, as an outcome of their morality. This chapter argues that prefigurative social movements create political theory through the interplay of their internal and external communication, their organization, and in their discussions of how and why to change the world: They are prefiguring political theory through their cognitive praxis. The chapter demonstrates how the literature on prefigurative social movements and Ron Jamison and Andrew Eyerman’s concept of cognitive praxis, combined with a decolonial feminist approach to knowledge and theory, provides space for the political theory of social movements within social movement literature. This theory is inherently political as it is aimed to be a (temporary) guide toward the kind of world the movements want to see and argues why the world should look like that.The chapter briefly outlines how a Cartesian approach to science prevents us from viewing theory based on lived experience as theory, even though all theory is based on lived experience, and thereby explains why we have not taken the knowledge and theory created by social movements seriously for so long. To recognize social movements as political actors, we need to engage with the concepts, policy proposals, critiques, or new institutions that they are creating, and not only the mechanics around creating them. Consequently, we need to recognize social movements as the authors of the knowledge and theory they create and not take credit for “discovering” it. Lastly, from a decolonial approach, we should recognize that social movement research is relational and that the research process should involve the social movements themselves to make sure they also benefit from it, and view them as colleagues who are sharing their knowledge with us. Moving away from the more Cartesian view of science requires a decolonization of the entire research process, and in particular rethinking what this means in terms of authorship, ownership, and credit.

Publisher

Springer International Publishing

Reference100 articles.

1. Arribas Lozano, A. (2018). Knowledge co-production with social movement networks. Redefining grassroots politics rethinking research. Social Movement Studies, 17(4), 451–463. https://doi.org/10.1080/14742837.2018.1457521

2. Allen, A. (2017). The end of Progress: Decolonizing the normative foundations of critical theory. Columbia University Press.

3. Alonso, M. F. (2008). Can we protect traditional knowledges? In B. de Santos (Ed.), Another knowledge is possible: Beyond northern epistemologies (pp. 249–271). Verso Books.

4. Anderson, C. (2020). Confronting the institutional, interpersonal and internalized challenges of performing critical public scholarship. ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies, 19(1), 270–302.

5. Anderson, C., Buchanan, C., Chang, M., Rodriguez, J. S., & Wakeford, T. (2017). Introductions. In Everyday experts: How people’s knowledge can transform the food system (pp. xix–xli). Coventry University. https://www.coventry.ac.uk/everyday-experts

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3