A Fresh Look at the Success of the Occupy Movement

By Clare Saunders, University of Exeter, Silke Roth, University of Southampton Cristiana Olcese, London School of Economics

Contact: silke.roth@soton.ac.uk

The Occupy movement has been seen as emblematic of protest in a global age. Throughout 2011 and 2012, Occupiers in more than 700 cities in 80 countries had set up camps to protest against the financial system, its inherent inequality and the failure of democratic and undemocratic regimes alike to deal with associated problems. Occupy camps have been considered to be motivated by the increasingly apparent unfairness of austerity measures, which governments brought to bear in the wake of the global financial crisis, which were spurred, in turn, by the collapse of Lehman Brothers in 2008.

Occupy was heavily reported in the media throughout 2011 and 2012, and it would be hard to have not noticed the movement take off. Now, in 2014, it has largely dropped out of the media spotlight. At the same time, the economic system remains, firmly to date, unchanged by this significant wave of dissent. Even when it was gaining significant media attention, Occupy was sometimes caricatured as a rather disorganised ideas factory: its openness, transparency and emphasis on participatory and deliberative forms of democracy meant that it lacked a discrete goal or any concrete plans for how we might create a better alternative to the current global financial system.

Does this mean that Occupy failed?

Not necessarily. No-one ever thought that thousands of tents alone could shut down a corrupt banking system, or create an equitable financial system – at least not in the short-term. In London, Occupy attracted support from broad swathes of the populace, most notably bank workers, including a Bank of England official, and prominent members of the Church. Canon Giles Fraser famously resigned from his position at St Paul’s Cathedral in disgust that the Church would be implicated in a violent eviction of peaceful protest on the Cathedral’s steps. So it did succeed in getting broad support and public sympathy.

Occupy lives on

Although Occupy London – at St Pauls and Finsbury Park – was evicted back in 2012, the movement lives on through various related enterprises and initiatives. It is, for example, behind an initiative called ‘RollingJubilee’, which, in its own words ‘buys up pounds worth of debt for pennies and then writes it off’. In addition to gathering the support of people from many different walks of life, Occupy was a huge success encouraging people to engage in politics as a day to day activity: that is, in academic speak, in ‘prefigurative politics’.

A peak on the inside

Only by looking inside Occupiers’ tents can we understand what Occupy really meant for its participants and who those participants were. Our research did exactly that. We conducted in-depth interviews with participants – many from inside the tents – and analysed data from a survey of participants to illustrate the very concrete success of Occupy. Our survey was part of the pan-European ‘Caught in the Act of Protest’ project, which has surveyed protests across Europe. We reveal how Occupy was much more than just a protest, and much more still than an unsuccessful protest. Indeed, for some, it was a way of life. For many of those, it represented a better way of life.

A diverse range of participants

In terms of diversity, we found that participants were from a wide range of backgrounds, although most were highly educated. What many had in common was a sense of the need for a new direction in their lives: many were in between jobs, or looking for a new place to settle. Some were homeless and/or mentally ill and in need of types of care not readily available in the City.

Living outside of capitalism

One significant success of the London Occupy camps was that they revealed to its participants the possibility of existing outside of the confines of the everyday capitalist system, unearthing and attempting to resolve issues thrown up by the capitalist system in the process. For some homeless and mentally ill people, the place was a panacea: food, shelter and the creation of humane and highly supportive community were part of Occupy London’s success story. Whether or not one was vulnerable in day to day society, it was possible to live at an Occupy camp on very little money. At the same time, it was possible to learn from and make use of mutually supportive community systems, including food provision and inclusive decision-making. Those participants who had previously been involved in more organised forms of politics (e.g. through formally organised NGOs) found Occupy to be a breath of fresh air: it was less exclusionary, more participatory and generally more rewarding than many of their prior political experiences.

Tensions in camp life

This is not to suggest that life at the Occupy camps was plain sailing. As in any fledgling community, the bringing together of a diverse body of people created tensions. Amongst other incidents, there were allegations of sexual abuse and complaints about drunken people. These incidents made it difficult always to  present the camps as respectable places for political dissent, especially to the well-to-do folk of the City. Despite these very real challenges, Occupy still managed to get itself cast in a largely positive light in the media. As our research illustrates, Occupy London also succeeded in interweaving on-line and off-line forms of political action.

A success?

So, in many ways, Occupy was a huge success. Unravelling the global financial system and instituting a more equitable alternative is no small feat. It is so challenging that it would be unfair to set that as a bench mark against which to measure the success of a protest movement. Successfully bringing together a diverse range of people in a temporary community to explore possible alternatives is no simple task, either. To succeed at that whilst gaining largely sympathetic press coverage, and to have sparked a host of follow-on political initiatives suggests that Occupy did not, not by any means, fail. It succeeded. And its legacy will doubtlessly endure.

This blogspot piece draws on a research article written by Silke Roth, Clare Saunders and Cristiana Olcese, ‘Occupy as a Free Space: Mobilization Processes and Outcomes’, published in Sociological Research Online, 19(1).

Stigma and Teenage Mothers

By Kyla Ellis-Sloan

 

Teenage pregnancy and parenthood are often cited as causes of a number of social problems in the UK. For example, it is pointed out that teenage pregnancy carries health risks for mother and baby and that teenage parenting leads to poverty and low educational outcomes. Consequently, teenage parenthood (and particularly motherhood) is considered to be a significant concern for policy makers in the UK. The previous Labour government responded to these concerns by implementing the Teenage Pregnancy Strategy. This aimed to reduce the incidence of teenage pregnancy and to support those who became teenage parents. In 2011 Sarah Teather (then Minister for Children and Families under the current government) stated that the prevention of teenage pregnancy remained a priority for the coalition but policies would be now implemented through an integrated localised approach rather than a centrally led and funded strategy.

Interestingly, these concerns and policy responses have emerged despite considerable debate as to the causes and consequences of teenage pregnancy. For instance, educational failure and poverty are argued to be causes rather than consequences of teenage pregnancy (see for example Arai 2009 and Duncan et al 2010). Furthermore, academics point out the significance of socio-economic status on poor outcomes. In other words, teenage pregnancy and parenthood is not inevitably nor inherently detrimental to mother and child. Nonetheless this body of work remains overshadowed by the negative associations noted above. Furthermore, dominant representations of teenage parenthood position the teenage mother herself as a social problem. This stems from long held and oft repeated assumptions that becoming a teenage mother brings with it an entitlement to housing and welfare benefits. Pregnancy is therefore often seen as a choice motivated by greed, immorality or laziness. It should then be of little surprise that there is a stigma attached to teenage motherhood.

Experiences of stigma became particularly apparent during an ethnographic study with young mothers. The research was conducted over a year at three separate teenage parent support groups and examined decisions made by young women as they become teenage mothers. In-depth interviews and observations at support group meetings were used to uncover motives, influences and constraints on key decisions such as those around contraception use. The research also focused on young mother’s interactions with support services and so considered decisions relating to education and employment following childbirth. These methods also, however, elicited reports of negative assumptions, hurtful judgements and sometimes ill treatment based on the women’s age and linked to the stigma attached to youthful parenting.

Drawing on Erving Goffman’s work (1963), stigma is defined here as being a characteristic or trait which brings an individual into disrepute. Stigma is applied to people who don’t meet the norms and values of society or who are believed to have behaved inappropriately. So, a pregnancy marks a teenager out as being ‘prematurely’ sexually active. The continuation of that pregnancy, when considered in conjunction with negative understandings of teenage pregnancy, marks teenage mothers out as being wantonly ignorant or even immoral. This article demonstrates that young mothers are keenly aware of the way in which teenage pregnancy and parenthood are publically perceived. The young mothers discussed in this article try to avoid this stigma by presenting their lives and decisions in ways which challenge dominant assumptions. For instance, they emphasise how they were not at fault for their pregnancies but have nonetheless taken responsibility and become good mothers.

The impact of stigma on teenage mothers and their families is an important field of study.  In a recent article, The Daily Mail drew on data from the Office of National Statistics to highlight stigma as a potential factor in the reported decline of teenage pregnancy (Chorley and Doughty 2014). Whilst it is possible that this is a contributing factor, we do not know whether stigma has been at the heart of declines which have been evident for some time. Moreover, I would urge caution in welcoming this outcome of the stigmatising of teenage motherhood. We know that in previous decades, shame attached to unplanned or unwanted pregnancy (for instance in the case of illegitimacy) often led women to extreme and horrific decisions about their own and their babies lives. I am not suggesting that this is likely to reoccur, not least because of the advent of contraception and abortion, but we do need to consider the implications for women driven to abortion through shame. Furthermore, we also know that stigma has important consequences for women who do become young mothers. For instance, we know that good quality ante-natal care is important to the well-being of both mother and baby. Where this has been accessed, many health risks associated with teenage pregnancy are reduced if not eliminated (Macintyre and Cunningham-Burley 1993; Irvine et al 1997; Botting et al 1998; Kaufman 1999). Yet stigma can deter young mothers from accessing support services during and after pregnancy. This brings into question whether stigma, rather than being a teenage mother per se, is at the heart of some of the poor health outcomes of teenage pregnancy. Stigma should not, therefore, be applauded as a way to reduce teenage pregnancy and parenthood. Indeed, this article recommends that greater efforts need to be made to challenge misconceptions surrounding young motherhood and thus reduce stigma.


This piece is based on the article by Kyla Ellis-Sloan published in the February 2014 issue of Sociological Research Online: Teenage Mothers, Stigma and their 'Presentation of Self'.

References 

ARAI, L. (2009) Teenage Pregnancy: The making and unmaking of a problem. Bristol, Policy Press.

BOTTING, B., M. Rosato, et al. (1998) Teenage Mothers and the Health of Their Children,  Population Trends 93: 19-28.

CHORLEY, M and S, Doughty. (2014) Dramatic fall inteen pregnancies to a record low after number of young mothers falls by 10% ina year MailOnline

DUNCAN, S., R. Edwards, et al. (2010) What's the Problem with Teenage Parents? In: S. Duncan, R. Edwards and C. Alexander (eds) Teenage Parenthood: What's the problem? London, The Tufnell Press.

GOFFMAN, E. (1963) Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity Harmondsworth: Penguin.

IRVINE, H., T. Bradley, et al. (1997) The Implications of Teenage Pregnancy and Motherhood for Primary Health Care: Unresolved issues, British Journal of General Practice 47: 323-326.

KAUFMAN, M. (1999) Day-to-Day Ethical Issues in the Care of Young Parents and Their Children in: J. Wong and D. Checkland (eds) Teen Pregnancy and Parenting: Social Ethical Issues. Toronto, University of Toronto Press.

MACINTYRE, S. and S. Cunningham-Burley (1993). Teenage Pregnancy as a Social Problem: A view from the United Kingdom, in: D. Rhode and A. Lawson (eds) The Politics of Pregnancy: Adolescent Sexuality and Public Policy. New Haven, Yale University Press.