This study examines the multiple collective identity of contemporary social movements and its mobilising structures in contemporary Latin American societies post-1980. This study debates ‘who they are’ in the contexts of many arguments about the c...
This study examines the multiple collective identity of contemporary social movements and its mobilising structures in contemporary Latin American societies post-1980. This study debates ‘who they are’ in the contexts of many arguments about the concept of collective identity based on the US and European social movement studies. Compared to the advanced countries, for Latin American social movement, it is not easy to demarcate the correct line between old and new forms of collective identity in the formation of social movement. Thus, beyond these complicated debates, this article scrutinizes more structural factors for confirming the existing multiple collective identity within social movements under the questions of: ‘why they mobilise’, such as social exclusion based on the socio-economic structure (poverty, unemployment, growing informal sectors, lack of an adequate social safety system); ‘how and what for’ the activities have organised themselves into multiple identity of collective actions.
Central issues here are: (ⅰ) historically, review the development of ‘old’ and ‘new’ forms of social movement involved with traditional labour-rural movements and new social movements in Latin American societies; (ⅱ) discovering the existing ‘multiple collective identity’ under conditions of changed moblising structures (socio-economic, socio-political and sociocultural dimensions) post-1980; (ⅲ) identifying their social demands (bread and butter, urban services, other resources), and finally ⅳ) asking contemporary meanings of democracy (establishing citizenship rights) and social change with them. Given multiple actors in the transformed mobilising structures, the contemporary social movements demonstrate a potential for creating more vibrant democratic societies and activities of this kind must surely be part of any attempt at democratic ‘deepening’.