ABSTRACT
The prevalent approaches of social movement research overestimate the degree to which social movement groups are rational actors when planning protest without investigating the process of planning itself. In a criticism of this tradition, recent movement studies argue that we need to investigate the microfoundations of political action. What strategies work and what effects different tactics have on other actors is a concern not only of movement scholars but also of activists themselves. By drawing on ethnographic examples, I show that activists can articulate strategic knowledge in their meetings in a way that resonates with findings in social movement studies about successful collective actions without activists having knowledge of this research. Therefore, I argue that we need a better understanding about the deliberations that lead activists to follow specific courses of action and disregard others, while also considering the role of strategic knowledge during such deliberations. In order to do so, we need to consider different cultural styles of groups, as well as investigate meetings as places where collectively agreed upon plans for protest emerge through the interactions of individual activists.
