Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: to be uploaded

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Scholars have recently called for the inclusion of emotions in social movement research, but there has been little comparative work on the topic. And so here I ask: What are the consequences of more instrumental versus affective mobilization? Focusing on the tension between workplace and community as sources of class formation, this study analyzes two cases that represent corresponding logics—“economic” versus “political”—of collective action. Drawing on in-depth interviews with participants, it examines how each type of collective action yields distinct forms of group consciousness and practice, in particular with respect to the sustainability of protest. The study finds that participants in a community-based campaign for a living wage ordinance develop what I call a perpetual struggle orientation in contrast to a group of strikers who are not so amenable to ongoing mobilization. These findings challenge conventional wisdom that the most militant workers are those withdrawing their labor at the point of production. To explain these anomalous results I argue that the instrumental logic of the strike led to a focus on material gains, and that once such goals were achieved workers were not compelled to continue the struggle. In contrast, in the affective living wage campaign, participants experienced the benefits of mobilization in psychological terms. In particular, they experienced personal transformation toward an activist identity which underwrote a commitment to continued mobilization.