Abstract
Strategic dilemma of social movements is one of the most crucial issues for the study of social movements. The resource mobilization theory has been concerned with strategic aspect of social movements. Its focus, however, is only on the dimension of institutional change. Another indispensable dimension of social movements, personal change, is totally neglected. This flaw is caused by the introduction of rational choice theory as its basic logic for explaining social movements.
In contrast, the new social movement theory calls attention to some grass-roots movements which oppose excessive state intervention to the civil society, request extending welfare provisions of the state and attempt to reform the normative order of the civil society itself. The new social movement theory defines these activities as new social movements pursuing both institutional and personal change at once. However, this theory would rather place these movements on a particular macro-structural and historical context called “Post-industrial society” or “late Capitalist Society”, than theorize strategic problems.
This paper will present 9 hypotheses concerning the strategic dilemma of social movements which aim at both institutional and personal change simultaneously. Four dimensions of strategic dilemma are mainly argued, that is, network characteristics, organizational structure, supports from third parties and effectiveness of constraint.
