ABSTRACT
Although conict is commonly viewed as conrmation of divisions within society, it is also an intensely normative affair. As Ralph H. Turner (1996: 1) observes, the actions of social movements “are invested with a strongly normative sense. Adherents of a social movement are concerned to correct an injustice, not merely a misfortune.” Therefore, he recommends, “explaining the normative element and the process by which it develops must play an important part in any comprehensive theory” (ibid.). This chapter is informed by a similar understanding, which is a very different perspective from the one that dominates contemporary social movement research. The latter is shaped by the concepts of mobilization and confrontation. It is widely accepted that social movements set up organizations, recruit participants, craft messages, foster collective solidarities, gain publicity, and mount campaigns in order to confront an opponent. Whichever perspective we take-resource mobilization, political process, political opportunity, dynamics of contention-it is safe to say that most current social movement research is based on the assumption that parties engaged in conict act instrumentally with respect to their goals and strategically towards each other. The outcome of such interaction depends ultimately on the balance of power within the relationship (see, for example, Tilly 1978; Tarrow 1994; McAdam, McCarthy and Zald 1996; McAdam, Tarrow and Tilly 2001).
