In regard to the British Suffrage Movement, similarly to The Civil Rights Movement, collective action and common purpose is also displayed. The NUWSS, the suffragists, led by Millicent Fawcett were a non-violent group that focused on lobbying members of Parliament to bring about legislative changes while the more aggressive WSPU, the suffragettes, led by Emmeline Pankhurst who were more militant in their ways to grab media attention and used as a bargaining tool to sway political change, a notable example was at Epsom Racecourse when Emily Davidson was knocked over trampled on by the Kings horse which gained mass media coverage aiding the movement. However, although both groups had different means to go about the same cause, there was no overall leadership over both groups within the movement, they didn’t necessarily work together just at the same time which potentially staggered the speed in which they achieved their aim. It took 56 years from the establishment of the suffrage movement to achieve full enfranchisement of women in the British electoral system but took The Civil Rights Movement 20 years to pass the Civil Rights Act due to leadership and collective action; rendering the leadership of the British Suffrage movement as mostly successful.
Identity in The Civil Rights Movement was also a symbol for a successful social movement. Due to the Slave Trade, African American presence in the United States of America was significant but still rendered them as a minority group by level of power. Being able to belong and participate in The Civil Rights Movement allowed them to initially identify with each other, unlike the suffrage movement, identification was more effective, it meant that their common purpose was easier to identify and relate to their community, identifying with one another will then bring about power when paired with social cohesion.
The suffrage movement in Britain and the United States had less correlation with identity amongst women. Due to the social environment of nineteenth century Britain and America, the desire to identify with a particular group amongst women was scarce until the latter part of the movement. Women would share the same and would be married into their husbands political and economic ideology and identity and would not associate themselves with the uncanny protesters. They were happy being housewives as they already had a sense of belonging in the limited state of society. Their disadvantaged social level was a norm and some women were fine with it. This stagnated the initial progress and success of both suffrage movements. Therefore, identity amongst women was a less successful variable.
On-going from Identity, social cohesion elevates from this symbol of success. In order to have successful social cohesion, unification of an Identity is required. This symbol of a successful social movement is shown in The Civil Rights Movement. It is arguable that the discrimination African Americans faced prior to the success of the civil rights movement was form of repression. Dieter mentions that that an increase in repression will raise protest, however, the rise of protest will be limited if repressive elements increase. Protest raised but repressive elements stayed the same, if not weakened. As The Civil Rights Movement progressed it was easier to stage a significant protest. Moreover, Leonie Huddy’s views of the Social Identity theory is exercised. Once there has been a unification of an identity group they can work more effectively in achieving goals and aims. As previously mentioned, the turnout for the March on Washington was over 200,000 the participation of activists was of a significant amount, while the earlier protests such as the “little rock nine” involved much fewer participants. As the The Civil Rights Movement became more identifiable and more unified the movement was the more success movement had. The successes of identity were a rolling success.
Similarly, In the British suffrage movement it is argued that initially social cohesion was minimal but grew to be successful just as The Civil Rights Movement. The establishment of the NUWSS in 1897 brought about minimal changes and successes, but membership to the NUWSS was low, it grew to 53,000 by 1914, by 1918 they were able to pass their first bill, The Representation of the People Act 1918 which enfranchised women over the age of 30 who could meet property qualifications and all men over the age of 21. A crucial step in granting votes for women. By this time the WSPU had around 5,000 members, the more militant group shed negative light on both the NUWSS, due to violent action, as they were seen as fighting for the same cause the social standing of women as they became involved in the industry men were in and women were working together, positively affecting social cohesion. This lack of unification stunted the progress and the successes of the suffrage movement in Britain making it a less successful but still notable.
The Suffrage Movement in the United States is more straight forward compared the British Suffrage movement in relation to social cohesion. In 1913 the National American Woman Suffrage Association (NAWSA) organised parade down Pennsylvania Avenue the first noticeable public protest organised. Women held a significant ratio in the United States and made cohesion effective. The successes of social cohesion didn’t necessarily bring about immediate changes. It wasn’t until the latter part of the nineteenth century that social cohesion played a significant role as more states had been granted the right to vote thus more women to participate.
Conclusion:
Overall, the successful symbols of sociological institutionalism in the Civil Rights Movement were all three symbols, however, in the Suffrage Movement in the United States and the British Suffrage movement lacked success in Identity as initially due to the social environment women were in were seen as normal amongst them. There were initially only a few women who thought they could be granted the vote and as more women identified, their social cohesion increased. One element which is rather significant is the role of leaders, as seen in all three case studies, a organised, influential leader makes an impact on the way the social movement excels. If there is a common identity and social cohesion, the lack of a fitting leader can affect the success of the social movement. Furthermore, it is also evident that identity and social status is a step toward social cohesion. Similarly, the use of third parties is also important as women were a minority in power and social status. This was seen by the lack of success in the late nineteenth century with the Suffrage movement in the United States, their leader was able to write speeches and convey a convincing message but it wasn’t until the alliance of the Bull Moose party that their movement started to accelerate. This applies also to the British Suffrage movement, as the NUWSS were trying to lobby a Parliament the WSPU made it hard for Parliament to deliver concession as their violent acts created a negative association to the movement collectively, after World War One, women activists were on somewhat better terms with those with higher social status and power levels. The level of success of a social movement does rely on the concepts mentioned, but there are external implications outside of sociological institutionalism that can determine whether a social movement succeeds or fails.
2019-3-27-1553682163