Which of the following distinguishes a social movement from social change in general?

It is sustained, organised action towards specific goals

It is continuous and largely the unintended result of many individual actions

It is sustained, organised action towards specific goals

It can take place only through elections

It never makes demands on the state

The argument that a social movement is an aggregation of rational individuals pursuing self-interest, each of whom joins only if they stand to gain, is associated with:

Mancur Olson's logic of collective action

McCarthy and Zald's resource mobilisation theory

Mancur Olson's logic of collective action

M. N. Srinivas's theory of Sanskritisation

The Tebhaga movement of 1946–47 in Bengal was a struggle of sharecroppers for:

Two-thirds of the harvest instead of one-half

The abolition of the Nizam's rule

Remunerative prices for commercial crops sold in national markets

Assertion (A): Relative deprivation theory holds that social conflict arises when a social group feels it is worse off than others around it. Reason (R): According to the book, perceptions of deprivation are by themselves always sufficient to produce a social movement.

Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A

Both A and R are true, but R is not the correct explanation of A

Social Movements — Theories, Types and the Movements That Shaped India

Many of the rights Indians take for granted — the vote, the abolition of untouchability, protection for tenants and workers, laws against dowry — were won through social movements. This chapter defines what makes collective action a social movement, sets out three theories of why movements arise and the limitations of each, and classifies movements as redemptive, reformist or revolutionary, and as "old" or "new". It then surveys the movements the book examines: the Chipko movement, peasant and farmers' movements, the workers' movement, Dalit and backward-class movements, tribal movements and the women's movement. The paper rewards exact pairings — a theory with its author, a movement with its region and decade.

What a Social Movement Is, and Why Movements Arise

Not every protest is a social movement. The book lists its features: sustained collective action over time; action often directed against the state, taking the form of demands for changes in state policy or practice; a degree of organisation, including leadership and a structure that defines how members relate to one another; and shared objectives and ideologies with a general orientation towards bringing about — or preventing — change. Social movements must be distinguished from social change in general: social change is continuous and ongoing, and often the unintended sum of countless individual actions, as in Sanskritisation or Westernisation; a social movement is directed towards specific goals and involves long, continuous and intentional effort.

Three theories of social movements, and their limits
Theory	Argument	Limitation noted
Relative deprivation	Social conflict arises when a group feels it is worse off than others around it; such conflict may result in collective protest	Perceptions of deprivation are not a sufficient cause; many deprived groups never form movements
The logic of collective action — Mancur Olson (1965)	A movement is an aggregation of rational individuals pursuing self-interest; a person joins only if he or she stands to gain from it	Cannot explain why people join movements at great risk to themselves, for causes from which they gain nothing personally
Resource mobilisation — McCarthy and Zald	A movement's success depends on its ability to mobilise resources — leadership, organisational capacity, communication facilities	A movement is not limited by existing resources; it can create resources, such as new symbols and identities

Types of Movements — Redemptive, Reformist, Revolutionary; Old and New

Redemptive or transformatory: aims to bring about a change in the personal consciousness and actions of its individual members — for example, the Ezhava movement in Kerala led by Sree Narayana Guru, which changed the social practices of the Ezhava community.
Reformist: strives to change existing social and political arrangements through gradual, incremental steps — for example, the movements for the linguistic reorganisation of states and the campaign for the Right to Information.
Revolutionary: attempts to radically transform social relations, often by capturing state power — for example, the Bolshevik revolution in Russia and the Naxalite movement in India.

Old and new social movements. "Old" social movements — such as anti-colonial nationalism and working-class and peasant movements — functioned largely within the frame of political parties and were centrally concerned with class and the reorganisation of power relations. "New" social movements, which spread from the 1970s, are less concerned with changing the balance of class power than with quality-of-life issues — a clean environment, women's rights, human rights, identity — and are often organised outside political parties, sometimes across national borders. The book cautions that in India the distinction is blurred: environmental and women's movements here are deeply bound up with livelihood and class.

📖 Chipko — ecology, livelihood and politics together

In the Chipko movement in the Himalayan region of present-day Uttarakhand, villagers — many of them women — came together to protect the oak and rhododendron forests near their villages from being felled by forest contractors, famously by hugging the trees. As the historian Ramachandra Guha's account shows, the movement combined ecological concerns with economic ones — the forests supplied fuel, fodder and other necessities of subsistence — and political ones, a protest against a distant state that sold village forests to outsiders. It is the book's example of why "new" movements in India are rarely only about the environment.

Peasants, Workers, Dalits, Tribes and Women

Peasant and farmers' movements the book names
Movement	When and where	Issue
Champaran satyagraha	1917–18, Bihar	Against the conditions imposed by indigo planters
Bardoli satyagraha	1928, Gujarat	Against an increase in land revenue
Tebhaga movement	1946–47, Bengal	Sharecroppers demanding two-thirds of the harvest instead of half
Telangana movement	1946–51, Hyderabad state	Against feudal conditions under the Nizam's rule
New farmers' movements	From the 1970s, beginning in Punjab and Tamil Nadu	Remunerative prices and the removal of levies; regionally organised and non-party, using road and rail blockades

Workers' movement: trade unions grew with modern industry; the All India Trade Union Congress (AITUC) was formed in 1920. After independence, unions became linked to political parties, which both strengthened and divided the movement.
Dalit movements: struggles for recognition as fellow human beings, for self-confidence and for self-determination — the book mentions the Satnami movement in Chhattisgarh, the Adi Dharma movement in Punjab, the Mahar movement in Maharashtra associated with Ambedkar, and the mobilisation among the Jatavs of Agra, as well as the anti-Brahmin movement in the South. Backward-class movements have sought political representation and a share of public employment.
Tribal movements: in Jharkhand, the tradition of resistance goes back to Birsa Munda, who led an uprising against the British in the late nineteenth century; the movement targeted the dikus — outsiders such as moneylenders and traders — and the state's control of land and forests, and led eventually to the creation of Jharkhand in 2000. Movements in the North-East have centred on identity, land and autonomy.
The women's movement: in the early twentieth century, national women's organisations emerged — the Women's India Association (1917), the National Council for Women in India (1925) and the All India Women's Conference — and women took part in the national movement and in peasant and tribal struggles such as Tebhaga and Telangana. From the 1970s a renewed, more autonomous women's movement took up issues such as violence against women, dowry and legal reform.

Key takeaways

A social movement is sustained, organised collective action with shared goals, often directed at the state; social change is continuous and often unintended.
Theories: relative deprivation; Mancur Olson's logic of collective action (1965); McCarthy and Zald's resource mobilisation — each with a limitation.
Redemptive (Ezhava movement), reformist (linguistic states, Right to Information), revolutionary (Bolshevik revolution, Naxalite movement).
Old movements worked through parties and centred on class; new movements centre on quality of life, though in India the line is blurred.
Chipko (Uttarakhand Himalaya) joined ecological, economic and political concerns in protecting oak and rhododendron forests.
Peasant movements: Champaran (1917–18), Bardoli (1928), Tebhaga (1946–47), Telangana (1946–51); new farmers' movements from the 1970s in Punjab and Tamil Nadu.
AITUC was formed in 1920; the Jharkhand movement traces back to Birsa Munda; the Women's India Association dates from 1917.

Practice questions (8)

Attempt each one before opening the answer. Every explanation names the tempting wrong option as well as the right one, because that is where marks are lost.

Which of the following distinguishes a social movement from social change in general?
1. It is continuous and largely the unintended result of many individual actions
2. It is sustained, organised action towards specific goals
3. It can take place only through elections
4. It never makes demands on the state
Show answer
Answer: B — It is sustained, organised action towards specific goals
A social movement involves sustained, organised and intentional collective action directed towards specific goals, often in the form of demands on the state. The first option is the trap because it describes social change in general — continuous and often unintended, as in Sanskritisation — which is precisely what the book distinguishes movements from.
The argument that a social movement is an aggregation of rational individuals pursuing self-interest, each of whom joins only if they stand to gain, is associated with:
1. Relative deprivation theory
2. McCarthy and Zald's resource mobilisation theory
3. Mancur Olson's logic of collective action
4. M. N. Srinivas's theory of Sanskritisation
Show answer
Answer: C — Mancur Olson's logic of collective action
Mancur Olson, in The Logic of Collective Action (1965), treated movements as the sum of rational, self-interested individuals. Its limitation is that it cannot explain why people join at great personal risk for causes from which they gain nothing. Resource mobilisation is the trap: it also uses the language of rational organisation, but it explains success by the ability to mobilise leadership, organisation and communication.
Match the type of social movement with the example the book gives.
A. Redemptive B. Reformist C. Revolutionary
1. The Naxalite movement
2. The Ezhava movement led by Sree Narayana Guru
3. The Right to Information campaign
1. A-2, B-3, C-1
2. A-3, B-2, C-1
3. A-1, B-3, C-2
4. A-2, B-1, C-3
Show answer
Answer: A — A-2, B-3, C-1
A redemptive movement seeks to change members' personal consciousness and practices, as the Ezhava movement did; a reformist movement changes arrangements step by step, as the Right to Information campaign did; a revolutionary movement seeks radical transformation, often by capturing state power, as the Naxalite movement aims to. Reading "reformist" as "social reform movement" and pairing it with the Ezhava case is the common slip.
The Chipko movement, in which villagers — many of them women — hugged trees to save the forests near their villages, took place in:
1. The Narmada valley
2. The Western Ghats of Karnataka
3. The tribal belt of Jharkhand
4. The Himalayan region of present-day Uttarakhand
Show answer
Answer: D — The Himalayan region of present-day Uttarakhand
Chipko arose in the Himalayan region of present-day Uttarakhand, where villagers protected oak and rhododendron forests from contractors; it combined ecological, economic and political concerns. The Narmada valley is the setting of a different environmental struggle, over large dams and displacement, which is why it tempts.
The Tebhaga movement of 1946–47 in Bengal was a struggle of sharecroppers for:
1. Two-thirds of the harvest instead of one-half
2. The abolition of the Nizam's rule
3. Remunerative prices for commercial crops sold in national markets
4. An end to indigo cultivation
Show answer
Answer: A — Two-thirds of the harvest instead of one-half
"Tebhaga" means three shares: sharecroppers demanded two-thirds of the crop rather than the customary half. Each distractor belongs to another movement — the Nizam to Telangana, remunerative prices to the new farmers' movements of the 1970s, and indigo to Champaran — so the question tests whether the movements are kept apart.
Consider the following statements about the new farmers' movements:
1. They began in the 1970s in Punjab and Tamil Nadu.
2. They were organised mainly by national political parties.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
1. Both 1 and 2
2. 1 only
3. 2 only
4. Neither 1 nor 2
Show answer
Answer: B — 1 only
The new farmers' movements began in the 1970s in Punjab and Tamil Nadu, so statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is false: they were regionally organised and non-party, involving market-oriented farmers who demanded remunerative prices and used blockades. Working through parties is a mark of the older peasant movements, which is the confusion being tested.
The All India Trade Union Congress (AITUC) was formed in:
1. 1885
2. 1905
3. 1947
4. 1920
Show answer
Answer: D — 1920
The AITUC was formed in 1920, as trade unions grew with modern industry in the years after the First World War. The year 1885 is the founding of the Indian National Congress, which is why the shared word "Congress" makes it tempting. After independence, unions became linked to political parties.
Assertion (A): Relative deprivation theory holds that social conflict arises when a social group feels it is worse off than others around it. Reason (R): According to the book, perceptions of deprivation are by themselves always sufficient to produce a social movement.
1. Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A
2. Both A and R are true, but R is not the correct explanation of A
3. A is true, but R is false
4. A is false, but R is true
Show answer
Answer: C — A is true, but R is false
A states the theory correctly. R is false: the limitation the book records is precisely that perceptions of deprivation are not a sufficient cause — many deprived groups never form movements, and other factors such as organisation and resources matter. The words "always sufficient" turn the theory's weakness into a claim it does not make.