Global Mobilization of Youth for Climate Change

Pretty fascinating how kids/youth (i.e. high schoolers and younger) are organizing on issues which they believe directly impact their security and well-being,  both at present and in the future.  This happened on Friday March 15, 2019 with the Fridays for Future global protests for climate change action, started by a Swedish teen. For more context on the protests, see this WaPo article.

Source: Fridays For Future webpage

There's been similar youth movements such as March For Our Lives advocating tighter gun control. With the horrific mosque shooting in New Zealand last week (or white supremacist terrorism - whichever way you want to label or frame  the story), I wouldn't be surprised if global youth activism on this issue becomes bigger.

It's great that the next generation are mobilizing on matters of global concern.  Social science research on life experiences during one's formative years suggests that these teens will be more civic-minded and politically engaged as they grow older.  Their longer term impact is less clear. Will they influence their peers (i.e. their generation)  which can help shift cultural/political norms. Will their activism help reframe existing debates and generate new ideas to existing problems which resonate with the "adults" right now? As the current youth get older, will their positions shift (or will they become jaded) as they recognize the power of corporate interests, prevailing socio-economic structures, and other national priorities which challenge their position?

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