Social Movements in the U.S.: Recent Headlines in the Washington Post

For a blog with the title "social movements" there's admittedly a paucity of postings. However, a couple articles in the Washington Post Sun. (May 8) edition about recent protest movements jive with academic theory on social movements.

The first is about Black Lives Matter, which has reportedly "entered a new phase — one more focused on policy than protest." With Trump now in office, activists are taking a different strategy moving from the streets to the halls of government. Quoting Stephen Zunes, the Post article elaborates on the importance of transitioning from formal to informal politics:

Black Lives Matter’s transition from street protests to policy is not unusual, said Stephen Zunes, a University of San Francisco professor who studies social movements. It’s through such work that a movement’s priorities — like mandatory use of officer body cameras — can become national standards, he said.

“That’s actually the way effective social movements often work or behave,” Zunes said, pointing to the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations in the wake of the financial crisis as a counterexample. “What the Occupy people did not learn, or by and large do, is go do the lobbying, the organizing to make change happen. They wound up fetishizing the ‘occupy’ part, and then, by and large, it fizzled.”   

The second article focuses on Dana Fisher's (from U.Maryland) work on protests movements. Some of her findings on recent protests movement in DC: the women's march, march for science (see Michael Heaney's observations here), climate change include the following:

• They are overwhelmingly people who voted for Clinton in the last election
• Marchers are well educated with over 75% holding a bachelor's degree
• Many first time demonstrators were present, and many cited Facebook as a source for finding out about the protest
• The motive for coming out to protest are variegated (i.e. it's usually not a single issue area like labor, environment, peace etc...)
• Trump's victory is a motivator for showing up, even though protest organizers state protests are not anti-Trump events

Pyongyang University of Science and Technology

I know or have met several people associated with the Pyongyang University of Science and Technology (PUST). Two weeks go, they detained Tony Kim, a U.S. citizen who had been teaching accounting at PUST. Now they've detained another American, Kim Hak-song. Both are alleged to have committed "hostile acts" against the regime. This bring the total number of Americans held captive in North Korea to four.

photo: Ian Wells, PUST websiite

My own thoughts about PUST have always been ambivalent. The people I know who've taught at PUST have shared really amazing stories about their time at the school which demonstrate the human (and for Christians, the Holy) spirit at work, and the potential for people-to-people exchanges with North Koreans. But at the same time, PUST as an enterprise which is 100% funded by foreigners, raises so many questions about the status of an overtly Christian school operating inside a repressive regime. 

Suki Kim, who worked as an undercover author posing as an English teacher, penned an op-ed questioning whether PUST is propping up the regime. Kim has offered measured criticism against PUST, even implying that PUST may be providing students technical skills which can be transferred for military purposes (which I think is way off mark). 

But she also writes in her op-ed, " Yet there is also a positive aspect to PUST. From living with these foreigners on such an intimate basis, these young, isolated North Koreans are exposed to the glimpses of the outside world and its freedom, which might eventually provide hopes for North Korea’s future."

I wish PUST the best, but news of recent detained citizens connected to PUST is certainly troubling, both from a human rights standpoint, and also for the future of PUST.