ABSTRACT
Chapter 8 considers the effects of a group’s dominant style on its development over time. It argues that being critical makes AANP more vulnerable to failure while thinking small furthers EXIT’s continuity at the cost of strategic adaptability. To demonstrate this, I analyze potential turning points for both groups where their dominant style is challenged but eventually not adapted. For AANP, a potential turning point is when activists self-critically reflect that they face several problems, one of them being reduced participation and another the failure to achieve a central goal of their Monday demonstration. These problems suggest to some activists that AANP should reduce its activities because it cannot achieve what it aims for. The analysis brings the individual orientation of activists towards anti-nuclear activism to light. The group, however, cannot agree to these changes and dissolves shortly afterwards. For EXIT, whose activists usually avoid critical reflection, a potential turning point is not perceived failure but an unexpected success that could challenge activists’ low expectations and invite them to adapt their strategy to exploit their success. Yet the group cannot agree on the nature of this success and does not adapt its style. Instead, activists focus on the future and the need to continue activism.
