Advertisement

Theory and Society

, Volume 47, Issue 5, pp 603–633 | Cite as

Boundary-work and the demarcation of civil from uncivil protest in the United States: control, legitimacy, and political inequality

  • Ruth Braunstein
Article

Abstract

Beyond the reaches of scholarly debates about how to define and value civility properly, social actors across various institutional domains routinely demarcate civil from uncivil behavior. Yet this everyday classification process remains understudied and undertheorized, despite being widespread and having significant stakes for the individuals and groups involved. This article begins to fill this gap by developing the concept of civility contests—practical efforts to draw symbolic boundaries between civil and uncivil individuals, groups, or behaviors. Through a focus on the realm of political protest in the United States, this article demonstrates that civility contests involve a wide range of political actors (including institutionalized power holders, opposing movements, and the media) who engage in this boundary-work in order to justify the control or (de)legitimation of protest. It then highlights patterned disparities in the outcomes of these contests, demonstrating that the likelihood of being marked as uncivil and the extent to which this prompts negative social sanction is shaped by one’s social position. Overall, the article seeks to stimulate and guide future empirical research on civility contests and to deepen theoretical understandings of the relationship between symbolic and social boundaries and the role of symbolic boundary-work in the reproduction of political inequality.

Keywords

American politics Boundary-work Civility Democracy Political inequality Social movements 

Notes

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank participants in the Politics of Social Change Workshop at the University of Connecticut (especially Andrew Deener and Erica Dollhopf), the Workshop in Cultural Sociology at Yale University, and the Public Discourse Project Seminar at the University of Connecticut’s Humanities Institute for their feedback on previous versions of this article, as well as Craig Calhoun and the editors of “Participation and its Discontents,” a blog in collaboration with the ASA Political Sociology section (Gianpaolo Baiocchi, Pablo Lapegna, Philip Lewin, and David Smilde), for their comments on an early version of this argument. I also gratefully acknowledge support for this project from the UConn Humanities Institute’s Humility and Conviction in Public Life Project.

References

  1. Adler Jr., G. J. (2017). ‘Neutral’ talk in educating for activism. In R. Braunstein, T. N. Fuist, & R. H. Williams (Eds.), Religion and progressive activism: New stories about faith and politics (pp. 308–327). New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Alexander, J. C. (1992). Citizen and enemy as symbolic classification: On the polarizing discourse of civil society. In M. Lamont & M. Fournier (Eds.), Cultivating differences: Symbolic boundaries and the making of inequality (pp. 289–308). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  3. Alexander, J. C. (2006). The civil sphere. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Alexander, J. C., & Smith, P. (1993). The discourse of American civil society: A new proposal for cultural studies. Theory and Society, 22(2), 151–207.Google Scholar
  5. Anderson, E. (2011). The cosmopolitan canopy: Race and civility in everyday life. New York: WW Norton & Company.Google Scholar
  6. Armstrong, E. A., & Bernstein, M. (2008). Culture, power, and institutions: A multi-institutional politics approach to social movements. Sociological Theory, 26(1), 74–99.Google Scholar
  7. Baiocchi, G. (2011). Cultural sociology and civil society in a world of flows: Recapturing ambiguity, hybridity and the political. In J. C. Alexander, R. Jacobs, & P. Smith (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of cultural sociology (pp. 232–259). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Baker, K. J. (2013). “Evil religion?” The Christian century. https://www.christiancentury.org/blogs/archive/2013-05/evil-religion.
  9. Bejan, T. M. (2017). Mere civility: Disagreement and the limits of toleration. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Benford, R. D. (1987). “Framing activity, meaning, and social movement participation: The nuclear disarmament movement.” Doctoral dissertation. University of Texas, Austin.Google Scholar
  11. Benford, R. D., & Snow, D. A. (2000). Framing processes and social movements: an overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 611–639.Google Scholar
  12. Bennett, T., Grossberg, L., & Morris, M. (2005). New keywords: A revised vocabulary of culture and society. Somerset: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  13. Bennett, E. A., Cordner, A., Klein, P. T., Savell, S., & Baiocchi, G. (2013). Disavowing politics: Civic engagement in an era of political skepticism. American Journal of Sociology, 119(2), 518–548.Google Scholar
  14. Bernstein, M. (2008). The analytic dimensions of identity: A political identity framework. In J. Reger, D. J. Myers, & R. L. Einwohner (Eds.), Identity work in social movements (pp. 277–301). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  15. Bernstein, M., & Olsen, K. A. (2009). Identity deployment and social change: Understanding identity as a social movement and organizational strategy. Sociology Compass, 3(6), 871–883.Google Scholar
  16. Beyerlein, K., Soule, S., & Martin, N. (2015). Prayers, protest, and police: The role of religion in differential state repression of collective action events in the United States, 1960-1995. American Sociological Review, 80(6), 1250–1271.Google Scholar
  17. Bloomberg, M. M. R. (2011). Statement of Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg on clearing and re-opening of Zuccotti Park. News and Press Releases, November 15. https://www1.nyc.gov/office-of-the-mayor/news/410-11/statement-mayor-michael-bloomberg-clearing-re-opening-zuccotti-park.
  18. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Bourdieu, P., Wacquant, L. J. D., & Farage, S. (1994). Rethinking the state: Genesis and structure of the bureaucratic field. Sociological Theory, 12(1), 1–18.Google Scholar
  20. Braunstein, R. (2015). The Tea Party goes to Washington: Mass demonstrations as performative and interactional processes. Qualitative Sociology, 38(4), 353–374.Google Scholar
  21. Braunstein, R. (2017). Prophets and patriots: Faith in democracy across the political divide. Oakland: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  22. Brooks, D. J., & Geer, J. G. (2007). Beyond negativity: The effects of incivility on the electorate. American Journal of Political Science, 51(1), 1–16.Google Scholar
  23. Brubaker, R. (1996). Nationalism reframed: Nationhood and the national question in the new Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Brubaker, R. (2004). Ethnicity without groups. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Bryan, F. M. (2004). Real democracy: The New England town meeting and how it works. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  26. Burke, P. (1993). The art of conversation. Somerset: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  27. Calhoun, C. (2012). The roots of radicalism: Tradition, the public sphere and early nineteenth-century social movements. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  28. Carter, S. L. (1998). Civility: Manners, morals, and the etiquette of democracy. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  29. Casteel, K. (2017). “How Do Americans Feel About the NFL Protests? It Depends On How You Ask.” FiveThirtyEight. October 9. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-do-americans-feel-about-the-nfl-protests-it-depends-on-how-you-ask/.
  30. Chafe, W. H. (1981). Civilities and civil rights: Greensboro, North Carolina, and the black struggle for freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Clemens, E. S. (1997). The people’s lobby: Organizational innovation and the rise of interest group politics in the United States, 1890–1925. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  32. Cobb, J. (2015). “Contingent Citizenship: Race and Democracy in the Age of Ferguson and Baltimore.” International Festival of Arts and Ideas, June 14. http://artidea.org/event/2015/1866.
  33. Cohen, J. L., & Arato, A. (1994). Civil society and political theory. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  34. Cressler, M. (2014). “Violence, ‘the Religious,’ and Black Power.” Religion in American History. http://www.usreligion.blogspot.com/2014/07/violence-religious-and-black-power.html.
  35. Cuddihy, J. M. (1974). The ordeal of civility: Freud, Marx, Levi-Strauss, and the Jewish struggle with modernity. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  36. Culpeper, J. (1996). Towards an anatomy of impoliteness. Journal of Pragmatics, 25(3), 349–367.Google Scholar
  37. Davenport, C., Soule, S. A., & Armstrong, D. A. (2011). Protesting while black? The differential policing of American activism, 1960 to 1990. American Sociological Review, 76(1), 152–178.Google Scholar
  38. de Tocqueville, A. (1969). Democracy in America. 1st perennial library ed. Ed. J. P. Mayer. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  39. Della Porta, D., & Reiter, H. (1998). Policing protest: The control of mass demonstrations in western democracies. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  40. Earl, J. (2003). Tanks, tear gas, and taxes: Toward a theory of movement repression. Sociological Theory, 21(1), 44–68.Google Scholar
  41. Earl, J., Soule, S. A., & McCarthy, J. D. (2003). Protest under fire? Explaining the policing of protest. American Sociological Review, 68(4), 581–606.Google Scholar
  42. Edwards, M. (2009). Civil society (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  43. Elias, N. (2000). The civilizing process. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  44. Eliasoph, N. (1998). Avoiding politics: How Americans produce apathy in everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Emirbayer, M. (1997). Manifesto for a relational sociology. American Journal of Sociology, 103(2), 281–317.Google Scholar
  46. Eulau, H. (1973). Technology and the fear of the politics of civility. The Journal of Politics, 35(2), 367–385.Google Scholar
  47. Fang, L. (2009). “Right-Wing Harassment Strategy Against Dems Detailed in Memo: ‘Yell,’ ‘Stand Up and Shout Out,’ ‘Rattle Him.’” ThinkProgress. July 31. http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2009/07/31/53761/recess-harassment-memo/.
  48. Ferree, M. M. (2004). Soft repression: Ridicule, stigma, and silencing in gender-based movements. In Authority in Contention. Research in Social Movements, Conflicts and Change, volume 25 (pp. 85–101). Bingley Ward: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
  49. Fetner, T. (2008). How the Religious Right shaped lesbian and gay activism. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  50. Fiorina, M. P. (1999). Extreme voices: A dark side of civic engagement. In T. Skocpol & M. P. Fiorina (Eds.), Civic engagement in American democracy (pp. 395–426). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
  51. Foschi, M. (2000). Double standards for competence: Theory and research. Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), 21–42.Google Scholar
  52. Fraser, N. (1992). Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. In C. J. Calhoun (Ed.), Habermas and the public sphere (pp. 109–142). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  53. Fridkin, K. L., & Kenney, P. J. (2008). The dimensions of negative messages. American Politics Research, 36(5), 694–723.Google Scholar
  54. Gamson, W. A. (1975). The strategy of social protest. Homewood: Dorsey Press.Google Scholar
  55. Gieryn, T. F. (1983). Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: Strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists. American Sociological Review, 48(6), 781–795.Google Scholar
  56. Gieryn, T. F. (1999). Cultural boundaries of science: Credibility on the line. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  57. Gieryn, T. F., Bevins, G. M., & Zehr, S. C. (1985). Professionalization of American scientists: Public science in the creation/evolution trials. American Sociological Review, 50(3), 392–409.Google Scholar
  58. Gitlin, T. (2003). The whole world is watching: Mass media in the making & unmaking of the New Left. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  59. Gleeson, S. (2018). “Donald Trump vs. NFL Players: Tracking President’s Anthem Remarks in War on Protests.” USA Today. May 24, https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2018/05/24/donald-trump-vs-nfl-players-tracking-anthem-remarks-protest/640055002/.
  60. Gould, D. B. (2009). Moving politics: Emotion and ACT UP’s fight against AIDS. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  61. Haines, H. H. (1988). Black radicals and the civil rights mainstream, 1954–1970. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press.Google Scholar
  62. Haines, H. H. (2006). Dangerous issues and public identities: The negotiation of controversy in two movement organizations. Sociological Inquiry, 76(2), 231–263.Google Scholar
  63. Hall, J. A. (2013). The importance of being civil: The struggle for political decency. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Harris, A., Evans, H., & Beckett, K. (2010). Drawing blood from stones: Legal debt and social inequality in the contemporary United States. American Journal of Sociology, 115(6), 1753–1799.Google Scholar
  65. Hayes, C. (2018). “Opinion | What ‘law and order’ means to Trump.” New York Times, March 19. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/17/opinion/sunday/chris-hayes-trump-law-order.html.
  66. Hefner, R. (Ed.). (1998). Democratic civility: The history and cross cultural possibility of a modern political ideal. Abingdon: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  67. Heitzeg, N. A. (2015). ‘Whiteness,’ criminality, and the double standards of deviance/social control. Contemporary Justice Review, 18(2), 197–214.Google Scholar
  68. Herbst, S. (2010). Rude democracy: Civility and incivility in American politics. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  69. Higginbotham, E. B. (1994). Righteous discontent: The women’s movement in the black Baptist church, 1880–1920. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  70. Isenstadt, A. (2009). “Town Halls gone wild” POLITICO.com. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/25646.html.
  71. Jamieson, K. H. (1999). Civility in the House of Representatives: The 105th Congress. The Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  72. Jamieson, K. H. (2000). Incivility and its discontents: Lessons learned from studying civility in the U.S. House of Representatives. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  73. Jamieson, K. H., & Cappella, J. N. (2008). Echo chamber: Rush Limbaugh and the conservative media establishment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  74. Jamieson, K. H., Volinsky, A., Weitz, I., & Kenski, K. (2017). The political uses and abuses of civility and incivility. In K. Kenski & K. H. Jamieson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political communication (pp. 205–217). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  75. Johnson, S. A. (2009). Religion proper and proper religion: Arthur Fauset and the study of African American religions. In E. E. Curtis IV & D. B. Sigler (Eds.), The new black gods: Arthur Huff Fauset and the study of African American religions (pp. 145–170). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  76. Kasson, J. F. (1990). Rudeness & civility: Manners in nineteenth-century urban America. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  77. Kennedy, R. (1998). State of the debate: The case against ‘civility.’ The American Prospect, December 19. http://prospect.org/article/state-debate-case-against-civility.
  78. Krugman, P. (2016). Opinion | both sides now? New York Times, July 18. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/18/opinion/both-sides-now.html.
  79. Lamont, M. (1992). Money, morals, and manners: The culture of the French and American upper-middle class. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  80. Lamont, M., & Molnár, V. (2002). The study of boundaries in the social sciences. Annual Review of Sociology, 28, 167–195.Google Scholar
  81. Landes, J. B. (1988). Women and the public sphere in the age of the French revolution. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  82. Lepore, J. (2010). The whites of their eyes: The Tea Party’s revolution and the battle over American history. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  83. Library of Congress. n.d. Alien and Sedition Acts (Primary Documents in American History). http://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/Alien.html/.
  84. Lofland, J. (1993). Polite protesters: The American peace movement of the 1980s. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.Google Scholar
  85. Loveman, M. (1998). High-risk collective action: Defending human rights in Chile, Uruguay, and Argentina. American Journal of Sociology, 104(2), 477–525.Google Scholar
  86. Mansbridge, J. J. (1980). Beyond adversary democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  87. Massaro, T. M., & Stryker, R. (2012). Freedom of speech, liberal democracy, and emerging evidence on civility and effective democratic engagement. Arizona Law Review, 54, 375–441.Google Scholar
  88. McEvers, K. (2017). “Ex-Green Beret and NFL Player on his Role in, Reaction to Anthem Protests.” NPR. October 17. https://www.npr.org/2017/10/17/558390590/former-green-beret-and-nfl-player-talks-about-take-a-knee-protests.
  89. Meier, A. J. (1995). Passages of politeness. Journal of Pragmatics, 24(4), 381–392.Google Scholar
  90. Mennell, S. (2006). Civilizing processes. Theory, Culture and Society, 23(2–3), 429–431.Google Scholar
  91. Milkman, R., Luce, S., and Lewis, P. (2012). Changing the subject: A bottom-up account of Occupy Wall Street in New York City. New York: Joseph F. Murphy Institute for Worker Education and Labor Studies, City University of New York.Google Scholar
  92. Moon, D. (2004). God, sex, and politics: Homosexuality and everyday theologies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  93. Morris, A., & Braine, N. (2001). Social movements and oppositional consciousness. In J. J. Mansbridge & A. D. Morris (Eds.), Oppositional consciousness: The subjective roots of social protest (pp. 20–37). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  94. Mouffe, C. (2005). On the political. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  95. Mutz, D. C. (2007). Effects of “in-your-face” television discourse on perceptions of legitimate opposition. American Political Science Review, 101(4), 621–635.Google Scholar
  96. Mutz, D. C., & Reeves, B. (2005). The new videomalaise: effects of televised incivility on political trust. American Political Science Review, 99(1), 1–15.Google Scholar
  97. Nepstad, S. E. (2015). Nonviolent struggle: Theories, strategies, and dynamics. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  98. Newman, A. (2014). Reaction to Eric Garner Grand Jury Decision. New York Times, December 3. http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/12/03/the-death-of-eric-garner-the-grand-jury-decision/.
  99. Ocejo, R. E. (2017). Masters of craft: Old jobs in the new urban economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  100. Oliver, P. (2008). Repression and crime control: Why social movement scholars should pay attention to mass incarceration as a form of repression. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 13(1), 1–24.Google Scholar
  101. Oliver, P. (2017). The ethnic dimensions in social movements. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 22(4), 395–416.Google Scholar
  102. On the Media. 2011. “The Tea Party vs. Occupy Wall Street.” Transcript. October 14, https://www.wnycstudios.org/story/164715-tea-party-vs-occupy-wall-street/
  103. Pager, D. (2003). The mark of a criminal record. American Journal of Sociology, 108(5), 937–975.Google Scholar
  104. Papacharissi, Z. (2004). Democracy online: Civility, politeness, and the democratic potential of online political discussion groups. New Media & Society, 6(2), 259–283.Google Scholar
  105. Patterson, T. E. (2017). Game versus substance in political news. In K. Kenski & K. H. Jamieson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political communication (pp. 377–390). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  106. Pearson, C., & Porath, C. (2009). The cost of bad behavior: How incivility is damaging your business and what to do about it. New York: Portfolio.Google Scholar
  107. Perrin, A. J. (2014). American democracy: From Tocqueville to town halls to Twitter. Somerset: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  108. Rafail, P., Soule, S. A., & McCarthy, J. D. (2012). Describing and accounting for the trends in US protest policing, 1960-1995. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 56(4), 736–765.Google Scholar
  109. Rhodan, M. (2017). “This Photo of MLK Kneeling Has New Power Amid the NFL Protests. Here’s the Story Behind It.” Time Magazine. September 25. http://time.com/4955717/trump-protests-mlk-martin-luther-king-kneeling/ .
  110. Ryan, C. (1991). Prime time activism: Media strategies for grassroots organizing. Boston: South End Press.Google Scholar
  111. Ryan, M. P. (1992). Women in public: Between banners and ballots, 1825–1880. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  112. Ryan, M. P. (1997). Civic wars: Democracy and public life in the American city during the nineteenth century. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  113. Sanders, L. M. (1997). Against deliberation. Political Theory, 25(3), 347–376.Google Scholar
  114. Sapiro, V. (1999). Considering political civility historically: A case study of the United States. Amsterdam: Annual Meeting of the International Society for Political Psychology.Google Scholar
  115. Schlozman, K. L., Verba, S., & Brady, H. E. (2012). The unheavenly chorus: Unequal political voice and the broken promise of American democracy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  116. Schudson, M. (1998). The good citizen: A history of American civic life. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  117. Schudson, M. (2001). The objectivity norm in American journalism. Journalism, 2(2), 149–170.Google Scholar
  118. Scott, E. (2017). “Poll: Majority of US says civility declined.” CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2017/07/03/politics/npr-poll-trump-civility-declined/index.html/.
  119. Smith, C. (1996). Disruptive religion: The force of faith in social movement activism. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  120. Smith, P., Phillips, T. L., & King, R. D. (2010). Incivility: The rude stranger in everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  121. Sobieraj, S., & Berry, J. M. (2011). From incivility to outrage: Political discourse in blogs, talk radio, and cable news. Political Communication, 28(1), 19–41.Google Scholar
  122. Somers, M. R. (1994). The narrative constitution of identity: A relational and network approach. Theory and Society, 23(5), 605–649.Google Scholar
  123. Staff, Politico. (2017). “Full Text: Trump’s Comments on White Supremacists, ‘Alt-Left’ in Charlottesville.” Politico. August 15. http://politi.co/2CL3YrT .
  124. Strachan, J. C., & Wolf, M. R. (2012). Calls for civility: An invitation to deliberate or a means of political control? In D. M. Shea & M. P. Fiorina (Eds.), Can we talk? The rise of rude, nasty, stubborn politics (pp. 41–52). New York: Pearson.Google Scholar
  125. Stryker, R., Conway, B. A., & Danielson, J. T. (2016). What is political incivility? Communication Monographs, 83(4), 535–556.Google Scholar
  126. Sugrue, T. J. (2018). Opinion | White America’s age-old, misguided obsession with civility. New York Times, June 29. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/29/opinion/civility-protest-civil-rights.html/.
  127. Sutton, R. I. (2007). The no asshole rule: Building a civilized workplace and surviving one that isn’t. New York: Hatchette Book Group.Google Scholar
  128. Tannen, D. (1999). The argument culture: Stopping America’s war of words. New York: Ballantine Books.Google Scholar
  129. Taylor, M. (2017). Social movements and mainstream media: Framing processes in an ideologically segmented TV news field. Doctoral dissertation. https://opencommons.uconn.edu/dissertations/1648/.
  130. Tea Party Patriots. (2011). “Occupy Wall Street? They’re No Tea Partiers” October 19, http://www.teapartypatriots.org/content/occupy-wall-street-theyre-no-tea-partiers-2/.Google Scholar
  131. Ward, I. (2017). Democratic civility and the dangers of niceness. Political Theology, 18(2), 115–136.Google Scholar
  132. Warner, M. (2000). The trouble with normal: Sex, politics, and the ethics of queer life. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  133. Weeks, K. M. (2011). In search of civility: Confronting incivility on the college campus. New York: James Morgan Publishing.Google Scholar
  134. Williams, R. H., & Demerath III, N. J. (1991). Religion and political process in an American City. American Sociological Review, 56(4), 417–431.Google Scholar
  135. Young, I. M. (2001). Activist challenges to deliberative democracy. Political Theory, 29(5), 670–690.Google Scholar
  136. Yukich, G. (2017). Progressive activism among Buddhists, Hindus, and Muslims in the U.S. In R. Braunstein, T. N. Fuist, & R. H. Williams (Eds.), Religion and progressive activism: New stories about faith and politics (pp. 225–245). New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  137. Zald, M. N., & McCarthy, J. D. (1979). The dynamics of social movements: Resource mobilization, social control, and tactics. Cambridge: Winthrop Publishers.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SociologyUniversity of ConnecticutStorrsUSA

Personalised recommendations