激进侧翼效应

激进侧翼效应(Radical flank effect)指社会运动中,激进派给持同一目标的温和派所造成的或积极或消极的影响,如认为激进派的存在会使公众给予持同一目标的温和派更多支持。[1]美国社会学家莱利·顿拉普(Riley Dunlap)认为,这一概念在研究社会运动的学者中享有广泛的可信度。[2]

历史

编辑

“激进侧翼”这一概念系于1975年首次提出。乔·弗里曼英语Jo Freeman在《女性解放的政治》(The Politics of Women's Liberation)中,[3]:28用“激进侧翼”指称女性解放运动中更具革命性的一类团体。“在这些(激进)社团的映衬下,女权主义的其他组织与个人倍显得体可敬。”[4]:236

“激进侧翼效应”则是由赫伯特·H·海恩斯(Herbert H. Haines)创设。[5]1984年,海恩斯发现,美国黑人运动激进派兴起后,温和的黑人运动组织所受资助不降反升。 [6] 在其1988年出版的《黑人激进派与民权运动主流:1954-1970》一书中,海恩斯质疑了当时的主流观点:“对抗性强的激进黑人活动家造成了‘白人的反冲英语Whte backlash(white backlash)’,使更温和的民权运动亦受到针对,陷入不利。”[7]:2 海恩斯反而论称“激进派所造成的混乱对黑人运动的进步而言,是必不可少的”,其为主流民权运动社团提供了帮助[7]:2

海恩斯将温和派在外部收入上的增加与在立法上取得的胜利作为研究的因变量,以此计量激进侧翼效应的积极影响。尽管因南方基督教领袖会议英语Southern Christian Leadership Conference种族平等会议英语Congress of Racial Equality等组织拒绝透露完整的财政记录,海恩斯研究中近半的温和派收入数据缺失或系估算而成,[8] 但其数据运用与道格・麦克亚当英语Doug McAdam资源动员英语resource mobilization研究相比,仍堪全面广泛。在部分温和派(如全国有色人种协进会)收入数据上,海恩斯的数据甚为详尽。[9]

影响

编辑

积极影响

编辑

消极影响

编辑
  • 激进派可能败坏某一社会运动的名声。[7]:3
  • 激进派可能会使温和派同第三方的合作更加困难。[7]:3

参考资料

编辑
  1. ^ Haines, Herbert H. Radical Flank Effects. The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social and Political Movements. Blackwell Publishing. 14 Jan 2013. ISBN 9781405197731. doi:10.1002/9780470674871.wbespm174. 
  2. ^ Mooney, Chris. How Science Can Predict Where You Stand on Keystone XL. Mother Jones. 17 Apr 2013 [25 February 2015]. (原始内容存档于2017-02-25). 
  3. ^ Dillard, Courtney Lanston. The rhetorical dimensions of radical flank effects: investigations into the influence of emerging radical voices on the rhetoric of long-standing moderate organizations in two social movements. 2002 [25 February 2015]. (原始内容存档于2022-11-11). 
  4. ^ Freeman, Jo. The Politics of Women's Liberation: A Case Study of an Emerging Social Movement and Its Relation to the Policy Process. Addison-Wesley Longman Limited. 1975. 
  5. ^ Herbert H. Haines. State University of New York College at Cortland. March 2007 [24 February 2015]. (原始内容存档于2021-03-03). 
  6. ^ Haines, Herbert H. Black Radicalization and the Funding of Civil Rights: 1957-1970 (PDF). Social Problems. Oct 1984, 32 (1): 31–43 [2022-11-11]. JSTOR 800260. doi:10.2307/800260. (原始内容存档 (PDF)于2022-08-08). 
  7. ^ 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 Haines, Herbert H. Black Radicals and the Civil Rights Mainstream, 1954-1970. Univ. of Tennessee Press. 1988. 
  8. ^ Mary Nell Morgan. An Imperfect Assessment of Movement Flank Actions. Southern Changes. 1990, 12 (1): 12–13 [25 February 2015]. (原始内容存档于2015-01-01). 
  9. ^ Herbert H. Haines, "Black Radicalization and the Funding of Civil Rights: 1957-1970" Social Problems, Oct., 1984 (University of California Press), pp. 31-43 (PDF). [2022-11-11]. (原始内容存档 (PDF)于2022-08-08). 
  10. ^ 10.0 10.1 Lyon, Thomas. Good Cop/Bad Cop: Environmental NGOs and Their Strategies toward Business 1. Routledge. 5 Feb 2010. ISBN 978-1933115771. 
  11. ^ Francis Fox Piven, Challenging Authority: How Ordinary People Change America (Rowman & Littlefield, 2006), pg 23-25
  12. ^ Emilye J. Crosby “‘This Nonviolent Stuff Aint No Good. It’ll Get You Killed.’: Teaching About Self-Defense in the African-American Freedom Struggle” in Teaching the American Civil Rights Movement, Julie Buckner Armstrong et al, eds. (Routledge, 2002) (PDF). [2022-11-12]. (原始内容存档 (PDF)于2022-11-12). 
  13. ^ “We Will Shoot Back – Reviews” NYU Press website. [2022-11-12]. (原始内容存档于2014-08-19).