TECHNOLCKKAL FORECASTINGAND SOCIAL CHANGE 35, 365-374 (1989)

Social Movements

JOSEPH HUBER

ABSTRACT

The new social movements-environmentalism, femuusm, pacdism, etc -are not really new, but recutrent
for at least two hundredyears They play an importantrule m the process of ongomg modermzatlon,even If
they mtendto be antunodemlstic They push for the pentical readaptattonof the mdustnal system to its natural
and culturalcontext

Social Movements and the “Long Cycle” Modernization Model

Social movements attract attention nowadays above all in the form of so-called new
social movements (NSM). Interest is directed towards the student movement, the ecology
movement, the alternative movement, the women’s movement, and the peace movement.
They have apparently been given the label “new” in order to distinguish them from the
“old” labor movement.
In tracing the history of mdustrralization (or modernization) back to the 18th century,
however, it emerges that that which is called NSM these days has appeared in its essential
forms many times already. Social movements are a phenomenon of modernization, “old’
social movements as much as “new” ones. As will be shown below, they are associated
with the developing mdustrial system’s readaptation to its cultural and natural surround-
ings. Regardless of whether or not they will be “post-industrial” in the future, social
movements will occur for as long as processes of modernization continue to exist.
In this respect it is worth nothing that the “new” contemporary movements reveal
long-term fluctuations in a manner which corresponds characteristically to the ebbs and
flows of the “long cycles” of industrial development. It must be said at the outset that
acceptance or rejection of the long-cycle model in no way implies acceptance or rejection
of the readaptation thesis, or that of social movements’ long-term fluctuating behavior.
Both theses exist of themselves. Their elucidatory value is enhanced, however, when
combined with each other.
The “long cycle” -labeled by Joseph Schumpeter “Kondratieff-cycles”, after one of
the model’s pioneers-are phases of between forty and sixty years duration during which
the modem world system has developed up to the present day.’ These long cycles form

JOSEPHHUBER, born 1948, soclologtst and economtst (Dr. rer pal.), ISpresently Pnvatdozent at the
Free Umverstty of West Berhn HIS recent pubhcmons, among others mclude. Tefeurbetr (T&work), 1987,
Die neuen Heuer (On Socral Serwces and Self-Help Movements), 1987, &ologu und Sonalpobnk, 1985, Du
zwet Gwrchter derArbeit (On Dual Economy), 1984, Die verlorene Unschuldder &ologle (New Technologies,
Environment and Supenndusmal Development), 1982
Address reptmtrequeststo Dr Joseph Huber, Frete UniversltdtBcrim, FB 15, hmestrasse21,lOOOBerlm
33, FederalRepubhc of Germany.
‘A recent survey of the “long cycle” theory can be found m [I] Also see [2]

0 1989 by Elsevia Science Pubhshmg Co , Inc 004O-1625/89/$0350

366 JHUBER

what Ernst Wagemann has referred to as the “basic rhythm” of the world economy” or,
in Werner Sombart’s words, the long rhythm in which “the monster can be heard breathing
m and out very deeply.” This quasirhythm comes about when old markets and industries
encounter limits to their development, whereupon, sooner or later, Investments then flow
to new markets and industries. Durmg the period of their rise and development, the new
markets and industries undermine and eclipse the older ones, only themselves in turn to
become npe and old and eventually undermined and eclipsed by still others. In this way,
penods of accelerated growth and prosperity are followed by times of stagnation and
depression.
One usually distinguishes long cycles from one another according to the basic tech-
nical mnovattons related to them [3]. In those countries where they can be shown to have
first occurred (Great Britam, the United States, France, Holland, Belgium, and also in
part Germany/Austria), the first phase took place almost exactly m the years between
1795 and 1848, the apex and turning pomt from the upswing to the downswing phase
occuring toward the end of the Napoleonic Wars in 1815. The key project during this
period was the mechanization of the textile industry, brought on by the development of
weaving and spinning machines. Coal and iron replaced wood as the most tmportant raw
materials. The key mdustries during the second phase (around 1850 until the mid-nineties)
were the railways and steam navigation. In the third phase it was electrification, accom-
panied by increasing application of chemistry (mid-nineties until mid-thirties, war-related
until around 1950). The fourth phase, which we are apparently still experiencing, 1s that
of mass motorization, the oil age. It has become almost commonplace by now to char-
acterize the next, now upcommg long cycle as that of mass computerization.
During any given period, of course, other industrial complexes also play a more or
less important role. There are also certain country- and mdustrial-branch-related excep-
tional features or trme differentials. These phases can (indeed must) also be classified
with respect to economic and political critena [4-6]. It then emerges that the modem
world system unfolds by markets and state institutions differentiating and restructurmg
themselves according to the course of the “long cycles.”
It is important here to recognize that contemporary “new” social movements and
their characteristic themes appear to occur, either initially or more frequently and mas-
sively than before, somewhere around the period that corresponds to a long cycle’s apex.
The time of occurrence can be several years earlier or later, but it is early or late within
just such a time span. Along with the apex and following downturn (stagnation) of a long
cycle, the respective social movements gain m strength, becoming diffused into ever
broader segments of the population, whereupon they gradually become weaker again.
When the transition to a new cycle begins, these movements, to the extent that they have
not already become exhausted or dtssolved from within, then retreat into the background,
only to return again decades later with yet greater vehemence.
The movements that return are never entirely the same, of course. The English and
French Age of Sentimentalism and the German Sturm-und-Drang of the 176Os-1780s
differ somewhat from the Romantic Era (1810-1835), just as this differed from the mid
to late century Boheme period, the Lebensreform and youth movements which persisted
down to the First World War, and today’s hippies, spontanuts, and alternatives. All these
movements are nevertheless clearly related to one another.
The forms of organization and expression such types of successive movements take
can differ considerably, and the social milieus which form the basis of a movement can
possibly have expanded or even changed. What remains the same, however, are the
typical themes and subJect matter. These relate especially to motives which stress col-
SOCL’U MOVEMENTS 361

lective and personal emancipation, whether for workers, for women, the young or the
aged, motives which emphasize youth unrest and the search for authentic life styles,
motives stressing protection of nature and the environment (from the earlier preservation
of historical monuments, down to contemporary ecology), a prevarling weariness and
critictsm of increasing industrialization and urbanization, as well as last not least pacifism,
consciousness expanding impulses, body-and-mind-sensitivity, awareness of “human po-
tential,” and far eastern knowledge and esoteric practice. With this in mind, it is possible
to compose a list of a series of typical threads, though one should not lose sight of the
fact that m the real movements, these threads frequently overlap:

0 labor movement,
0 women’s movement,
0 youth movement,
l movement of aged persons (contemporary and future),
0 Lebensreform,
0 criticism of ctvilizatton (including criticism of culture, mdustry, urbanization,
capitalism, bureaucratization, centrahzation, science and technology),
0 movement for the protection of nature and the environment,
0 care for one’s homeland and culture,
0 pacifism and peace movement,
0 expansion of consciousness, personality, sensitivity, etc.
l spiritual movements.

Examples of Social Movements of the First “Long Cycle” (National Youth

Movements, Romanticism, Early Socialism)
The typical themes and subject matters mentioned above already find clear expression
m the first long cycle, especially in the period between 1815 and 1848. For example,
bourgeois youth in Germany formed up a movement of democratic-national student
protest, which eventually went on to provide the basis for other groups coming together
to form “Young Europe” between 1834 and 1838 (parallel to similar developments in
other countries, such as Giovine Italia, La jeune France, Young Ireland, Young Poland).
The movement of youth protest had many personal and programmatic ties to ro-
manticism, which determined the entire epoch’s zettgeist. The reduction of importance
placed on inherited social forms, if not their complete dissolution, as a means of achieving
immediate “authentic” access to life, to one’s self, to one’s fellow beings, and to nature,
IS one of romanttcism’s central themes. This implies the most diverse theones of alien-
ation, together wtth negative valuations concerning modem industrial society and (for
the most part positively prejudiced) hypotheses about the “true nature” of nature and
people.
In England, the Adventists were established around 1830, for example. They were
the first to advocate the “alternative” mixture of religiosity (spiritualism), vegetarianism,
and alteranon of life-style. The group experiments conducted at that time by the utopian
socialists may be regarded as an example of a type of first alternative project scene. The
first citizens initianves were formed for preservation of historical monuments and one’s
native land. In Germany, for example, a citizens initiative was set up for the purpose of
protecting castle ruins on the Rhine River from quarrying interests, as well as then
preservation, together with the surrounding forests and vineyards, as cultural monuments.
The Mahhusian population theory provided the basis for the first debate concerning
the hmits to growth. The theory, which had been published in 1798, but went largely
368 J HUBER

unnoticed until the 1820s and 183Os, mamtained that it is futile to attempt to provide for
general welfare through industrialization, since the birth rate of the poor always tends to
outstrip the means of its subsistence. John Stuart Mill formulated his ideas on a stationary
or steady state economy, which indeed is the first zero-growth theory. He also was an
early advocate of the counterproductivity thesis, or theory of social costs: Benefits increase
less quickly than damages brought on by industnalization (which was then only m its
nascent stages!). Industrial methods of agriculture rob the landscape of its charm. One
should work less and devote more attention to mastering the art of hvmg.
Such proposmons and attitudes also had determining influence on romantic political
and economic theones (m Germany Adam Muller, Franz Baader, and Joseph GBrres).
In the years between 1810 and 1835 they brought forth works critical of industry and
capitalism that already then contained all the essential elements of contemporary ecoli-
terature-including, among other things, the conviction that mdustrial cultivation of the
sot1 amounts to high treason; that the mutually devouring waves of commercial industry
which sweep over the land only serve to divert people from the correct path of life
(alienation); that an unregulated market necessarily leads to periodic crises m which,
simply for the sake of enriching a godless class of capitalists, natural resources and human
existences are destroyed, resulting in monstrous pauperizatton, impoverishment, and
depletion. They attacked the free labor market as white slavery. The development of
proletarianization and pauperization were processes that could no longer be ignored.
Even though, m compartson to other European countries, German/Austrian roman-
ticism took a conservative turn, tt nevertheless did succeed m making a pioneering
contribution to pointing out and formulatmg the central themes of the social question. It
is difficult to conceive of Marxism, for example, devoid of romantic social critictsm,
notwithstanding the fact that Marx-like Goethe or Heme before, Lukacs or Nietzsche
after him-adhered to those ctrcles of authors who steadfastly refused to admit to the
presence of romantic influences m their works [7, 81.
However this may be, parallel to romatic social criticism, the Luddite rebellion did
occur in England between 1811 and 18 16, followed by a series of labor rebellions on
the continent in the 1830s and 184Os, most notably the big weaver tebelhons in Lyon
and Silesta. The first worker and skilled manual labor organizations were formed, among
them m 1836-1838 the Chartists.
In upper bourgeois circles, especially in England, the first disputes arose around the
women’s right to vote. We are confronted at the same time with one of the first women’s
“hbbers” in the form of George Sand (1804-1876), the French poetess who assumed a
man’s name and smoked cigars. Though an outstanding personality, she was m no way
a umcum, but one exponent of the emerging women’s liberation movement.
Concerning the peace movement, Mennonites and Quakers in London and New York
founded the first peace societies in 18 15-1816. Like so many other key political concepts
of the time, such as the “social question” and “social class,” the word “pacifisme” was
first struck in France in the decade of the forties. The first international peace congresses
took place in Brussels m 1848, Paris m 1849, and Frankfurt in 1850.
With regard to the consciousness-expanding criticism of rationalism, finally, mention
has aheady been made of the establishment of sects. Typical of his time, for example,
was Schopenhauer as well, who sought refuge in Hinduism and Buddhism. Apart from
that, romanticism itself was indeed a movement of heightened awareness and personality
development, which includes drug consumption and esotericism. Even though tt was still
limited to quite small artist and literatic circles, all the ingredients of psycho boom can
SOCIAL MOVEMENTS 369

aheady be seen to have existed by then. It wasn’t until most recent times, however, that
this phenomenon assumed the proportions of a flourishing body-and-mind market.
It cannot and should not be the purpose af this paper to elaborate further on individual
movements such as those listed above. It is equally impossible to give here a resume of
the characteristic elements of this pattern in the second, third and, finally, fourth long
cycle of the present day, because these movements and characteristics differentiate step
by step to an extent which goes far beyond the frame of an article like this one. Here it
must suffice to state the hypothesis as such. Extensive documentation in support of it can
be found in the literatum2

The Paradigm of Human Ecology and the Role Social Movements Play in the
System’s !bciocwbgical Readaptation
Despite all their particular differences, social movements have in common the fact
that they make issue of what ate referred to as “social questions” and ‘ecological questions,”
which nowadays are subsumed under the paradigm of human ecology (sometimes as
social ecology).’ The human ecology paradigm also takes in questions of cultum in the
more narrow sense. Social ecology investigates the relationship between the industrial
system and its environment. This relationship is not only biophysical, but sociocultural
as well.
The immediate causes and concerns of social movements lie in restructuring the
relationship between system and environment, i.e., the relationship between the industrial
system and its cultural and natural surroundings. In accordance with the nature of the
system-environment relationship, social movements can proceed from two points of
departure. On the one hand, they can assume the form of a critique of the tendency to
one-sidedness and other problems associated with the system’s development, in which
case social movements sre constantly concerned with protecting people and nature from
the developing system, or with (re-)embedding the system itself in its social and natural
environment. However, it can also take the form of a somewhat autonomously operating
sociocultural developmental impulse, which is the case with regard to emancipation and
personality development, for example. The demand to do justice to these impulses is
placed upon the industrial system by the cultural context ‘from without,” as it were. As
a rule, both points of depaiture are followed more or less simultaneously. The labor and
women’s movement provide a good example here: While criticizing the specific repressive
and exploitative manifestations of the system’s development, they also develop in part
entirely independent general visions of emancipation. One could say then that the im-
mediate cause and task of social movements lie in the socio-ecological readaptation of
the developing industrial system to the demands and requirements placed on it by its
cultural and natural context.
In both cases-culture- and nature-related questions arising from the system’s de-
velopment, or questions of system reform arising within an evolving cultural or natural
context-social movements place normative priority on the cultural and natural context
over the demands of the system. And in both cases they intend to achieve a (xe-)adaptation

*Thedocmneotationreferredto cao be found partxularly m Schweodter [9] and Sieferk [lo] Schwendter
works expFcsrlywith the bog cycle model; Sieferle does not. For this reasoo It 1s stdl mae unpressive that
Sieferle aranges the moveoxnts he sties thematically and chrooologically m a m- that corfespoods
exactly to the model of the long cycle
)For no explaoation see Huber [ll]; earher. G. Stapledon [12]. Sargent [13], nod Marcuzzr[14].
370 J HUBER

of the system to its environment, not the adaptation of people or nature to the imperatives
of the system, however. Due to their giving priority to the “life-sphere,” social movements
are emphatically antitechnocratic. The fact that for the most part they end up forcing
people and nature to adapt as well is at least not intended, and this explains the problems
social movements have with every form of realpolitik. However, since their goals imply
the restructurmg reform of a system, and every process of restructurmg necessarily implies
de facto the system’s buildup or expansion, social movements, whether they want to or
not, are also involved in the system’s buildup.
The socio-ecological readaptation approach also provides a theory for the long-term
fluctuating character of social movements, their coming and gomg, strengthening and
weakening, expansion and stagnation. The upswing phases of the long cycles (the Na-
poleonic Era down to 18 15, the period of bourgeois glory 1848-1873, the Belle Epoque
ca. 189%1915/20, the period of the “economic miracle” ca. 1948/52-1967/73) are not
only periods of prosperity and growth; they also bring about-ither simultaneously or
with a certam delay-resistance and social and ecological problems. In its process of
development, the system enters mto a state of tension with its cultural and natural context.
This context (= system environment) must then be developed in part along with it, or
the system must be readapted to its social and natural environmental conditions by means
of reforms and mnovations It is precisely this which is the cause and SubJect of social
movements
At the apex phase of a long cycle, their central thematic is still occasionally in the
form of a utopian prosperity protest. As the long cycle proceeds into its period of decline,
however, they take above all the form of crisis movements. Social movements stagnate,
weaken, or even dissolve when they have achieved a certain degree of resonance, their
goals thus having more or less gamed acceptance, and when-in addition to the ever-
present dynamic of exhaustion from within-a newer, external upsurge m the system also
takes place.
Social movements serve the developing modem society as a source of self-criticism
and self-correction.’ They are thoroughly modem movements, even if at times their
statements and intentions should to cause them to be misunderstood. Their effect is further
modernization of the modem age. Up to now, to paraphrase Mephisto m Goethe’s Faust,
they have served as a constant force, one which, though it does not always desire good
for industrial society, nevertheless always produces it.
Often enough, however, social movements also regard themselves as movements of
modernization. This applies especially to the major part of the labor movement. The
nationalist-democratic youth movement around the beginning of the 19th century or the
majority within the women’s movement are also progressive movements, i.e , they hold
on tightly to essential elements of the rationahstic utopia of social progress, universal
welfare, eternal peace, political equality and economic parity for all people, as well as
their individual freedom to develop within the context of modem acquisitive society.
Yet it is Just as correct to regard social movements as bearers of the modem age’s
Rousseauean romantic tradition. Certain minor tendencies within the labor movement,
and still more considerable minorities the women’s movement (cult of motherhood, moon,
and nature or similar), could be mentioned here. Above all, the youth revolt, alternative
life-style movement, peace movement, cultural and environmental protection movements

?ourame [15], for example, defined the student movement (as spearhead of the new social movements)
as essentially as “antt-technocratic movement” already m 1969
%e also Brand, Busser, and Rucht [16], also Huber [17]
SOCIAL MOVEMENTS 371

take care for the most part to keep within this tradition. In complementary contrast to
the progressive tendencies within the social movements, one can speak here of their
regressive tendencies. This is why Horst von Gyzicki described the NSM-~orrectly but
insufficiently-as ‘creative regression.”
“Regressions” appear to play an important role in every complex system’s devel-
opmental process. Their function is to recall those aspects of a system’s developmental
process necessary to its continued survival which are threatened with atrophy and dis-
appearanctio unite and come closer to them. This involves reflexive processes of
increasing self-assuredness, readaptation, and reidentification. Regressive phases con-
tribute to this, however, only to the extent that they lead to new progressions, just as,
reversely, every progression sooner or later comes up against internal and external limits
which themselves want to be “handled” in order that the process of development can go
on.
The example of the contemporary ecology movement serves to elucidate this. During
the seventies, neo-Malthusian “creative regression” dominated here-in part conservative
(such as the Club of Rome and the debate on the limits to growth, for example), in part
radical (such as the New Alchemists and the Radical Technology Movement). Each
possessed its own appropriate dose of neoromanticism. In the course of the eighties,
however, the judgement began to prevail that the ecological metamorphosis cannot exist
apart from or m opposition to continued system development, but rather only in and with
it, even when in conflict with it. Though not exclusively, the answer to the ecological
question must also lie in the continued modernization on the basis of science and tech-
nology while at the same time meeting the requirements of economic efficiency, social
welfare, and a state governing under the rule of law. This is the new progressive change
that has taken place within the ranks of the Griinen “realists” (even as “realists,” however,
they constantly try to force the system to conform to cultural and natural needs, not the
reverse); the “fundamentalists,” on the other hand, are showing increasing signs of a
regressive pathology.
It is not possible to simply classify social movements either as “progressive” or
“regressive.” They always display both tendencies, though with m part differing points
of emphasis. This lies in the nature of their soclo-ecological mission. Social movements
are not for or against progress as such (they are, nolens volens, modem); rather they
react either in a progressive or a regressive fashion (or a confused combmation of the
two) to the problems of progress. The question of how system and environment can be
made to readapt to one another is answered both with “continue as before/contmue
differently” and “stop/reverse the process”; the two options are enduring.

The Social Bearers (Classes, Strata, Milieus)

Time and again the classes, strata, and milieus that carry social movements come
to occupy the center of attention. Some believe that use of this class criteria makes it
possible not only to describe social movements empirically, but to define them theoretically
as well. It is also looked upon as the criterion that distinguishes the labor movement from
the NSM, since the labor movement was composed mainly of urban skilled workers and
industrial laborers and, later on, white collar workers as well. But though bourgeois
intellectuals have indeed played an important and often dominant role in the labor move-
ment, they have always constituted a numerical minority in it. Gn the other hand, NSM
activists and sympathizers have for the most part come exclusively from the middle strata,
especially those social and professional strata with a Protestant enlightenment cultural
background in the broadest sense.
372 J HUBER

Nevertheless, the cnterium of class is of dubious definmonal value, since the class
structure of modem society, when regarded m its historical dimensions, changes (is
becoming differentiated) with what amounts to breathtaking speed. Is it still possible to
make any coherent comparisons at all between the aristocrats, members of the upper
classes, of the educated classes, the petty bourgeois, skilled manual workers, laborers,
and farmers around the mid-19th century, and the diverse categories which make up
contemporary middle class society? At best it would be possible to draw conclusions
relatmg to the social movement’s direction of diffusion: Whereas the labor movement
tends to diffusion gross0 modo “from bottom to top,” the NSMs tend to proceed “from
top to bottom.*’
This conclusion indicates that social movements do from time to time attempt to
reach out and further extend themselves. This does not necessarily imply that the actual
numbers of activists are constantly on the increase, but that m every case movements
enJoy ever-increasing resonance m ever more social strata and milieus, and that this keeps
occurring in ever more countries.
The women’s movement demonstrates this clearly. During the first half of the 19th
century, women’s liberation was a preoccupation among small circles of educated, m-
tellectual and culturally aware members of the upper class in England, and also Holland
and France By the second half of the century, however, women’s rights organizations
also existed m Italy, Germany, and Scandanavia, and had reached out to Include strata
from among the entire bourgeoisie. Already well organized prior to and after World War
I, the women’s movement drew additional support from the earlier petty bourgeoisie, the
new employee strata, and m working class circles as well (breakaways from a proletarian
women’s movement), and by this time it had reached East Europe and the Soviet Union
as well In the sixties, finally, the women’s movement appeared once agam in the form
of feminism, as did the other NSMs, originating m the hegemonial center of the time,
the United States, and quickly spreading to Europe and Japan and then on to more
peripheral and developing countries of the world system Today, highly developed wom-
en’s, ecology, and alternative movements can be found m countries like Argentina or
Brazil, for example.
Although the NSM m the peripheral countries are still clearly limited to the upper
social strata, in the northern metropolises the feminist and ecological impulses have already
achieved a certain degree of resonance among the lower middle strata. These impulses
contmue to remain entirely ahen only to distmctly lower strata milieus.
The formation of the modem world m forty to sixty year long cycle rhythms en-
compasses ever broader strata in ever more countrtes around the world. In this very same
way these typical social movements can also be found in ever more strata and ever more
countries

Concerning the Relationship between Social and Political Movements

What happens when social movements go beyond the threshold of response from
mmorities to achieving resonance among a maJority of people, and when their organi-
zations no longer merely undergo the usual processes of institutionahzation, but them-
selves become supportive constituents of the fabric of social institutions? The labor
movement provides the prime example here., followed to some extent by the peace
movement as well (Hague Conventions, League of Nations, and the United States). It is
probable that the organizations that make up the women’s movement, and also the
increasingly active movement of the aged will follow a similar course in the coming
generations
SOCIAL MOVEMENTS 373

National Socialism, and indeed the phenemenon of European fascism as it occurred

in the decades of the twenties to the forties, are often mentioned in connection with the
question of mass response, the establishment, even etatization of social movements. For
this reason it is important to distinguish somewhat more exactly between social movement
and political movement. National Socialism (the NSDAP) was a political movement.
Communist parties or, in very much smaller dimensions, the German Grtlnen constitute
political movements-as, of course, does all activity which occurs within the triangle of
hberal, conservative, and socialist parties, even if at times it may seem that in fact very
little is happening at all anymore
Political movements undoubtedly do draw their support from social movements
and recruit their members from them. National Socialism would hardly have been im-
agmable without the social movements of the romantic hyper-Germanness (the Teu-
tonic and Aryan cult), antisemmsm, pessimistic criticism of capitalism and industry
(“Kulturpessimismus”), and the nationalist movement for nature and homeland pres-
ervation (“Blut und Boden”). Only parts of these social movements provided a source
for fascism, however, and they were not the only sources. Social movements as such
certamly were not predisposed to fascism. While a turning to fascism was possible, it
did not have to happen.
A social movement can become a political movement, or nourish one, if it strives
for methods inherent in a given system for changing that system, and for positions of
power within the state and economy. It can also choose not to do so, however, a decision
which is made by many of those who strive for personal transformation and reform in
life-style, for example, not to mention the multitude of spiritualist sects. On the other
hand, a political movement can be formed without any particular social movement pre-
ceeding it or it with a base. PouJadism and other “taxpayer parties,” or American “neo-
conservatism” of the eighties, serve as examples of this.
The distinction between social and political movement has its equivalent m Anglo-
Saxon research into social movements, which is marked by a controversy over whether
social movements are noninstitutionalized forms of collective action, or whether they
grow out of mstitutionahzed forms. The former is known as the “traditional approach,”
while the latter is referred to as the “resource mobilization approach” [ 181. Though
diffusion processes in both directions are theoretically possible, in practice I only know
of examples of political mstitutionahzation of social movements, not the reverse--unless
one chooses to regard extensive campaigns as “social movements.”
Since the sixties, the NSM have only partly developed into political movements.
The Gninen, who trace their origins back to the ecology and women’s movements, and
also to some extent the peace movement, actually constitute an exception to the rule. In
most other countries, as opposed to Germany, the mere threat of new political competition
is enough for the established parties to co-opt the NSM’s important themes and concerns.
It has become opportune for polmcians of every persuasion to portray themselves as
peace-loving environmentalists who are very sympathetic to women’s issues.
By their very nature, those social movements which are either predominantly or
exclusively mfluenced by the Rousseauean romantic tradition are little inclined to organ-
izational durabihty and pohtrcal instituttonahzation. Thus they are much more inclined
to vehement spurts of activity and stimulation of the prevaihng spirit of the time. As
wheels of time do not stand still, the spirit of the time has been changmg again. The
present future of the NSM has already become past by now But they ~111have another
coming future again-for them a renewed promise of a new ideational age, m practice
a further step in modernization.
374 J HUBER

References
1 Klemknecht, Alfred, Innovatton Patterns m Crtsrs andProspenry Schumpeter’s Lang Cycle Reconsufered,
Macmdlan, New York, 1987
2 Freeman, C , Clark, J , and Soete, L , Unemployment and Technrcal Innovatzon A Study of Long Waves
and Economic Development, Frances Pmter, London, 1982
Analysis ofthe Caprtahst
3 Schumpeter, Joseph A., Busmess Cycles A Theoretical, Hlstoncal, andStatrstlca1
Process, McGraw-H111,New York, 1939, 2 vols
4 Namenwntb, J ZVI, Wheels of Time and the Interdependence of Value Change m America, Journal of
Interdrsclplrnary History 3(4), 649-683 (1973)
5 Weber, R Ph , Society and Economy m the Western World System, Socral Forces 59(4), 1130-1148
(1981)
6 Khngemann, H -D , Mohler, P Ph , and Weber, R Ph , Cultural Indicators Based on Content Analysis
A Secondary Analysis of So&m’s Data on Fluctuations of Systems of Truth, Quality and Quantity 16,
l-18 (1982)
7 Bremes, P , Marxism, Romanticism and the Case of G Lukacs, Studtes m Romanttclsm 16(4), 473489
(1977)
8 Gouldner, A W , For Sociology. Pengum, New York, 1975, pp 321ff
9 Schwendter, Rolf, Zur Geschrchte der Zukunft, Synddcat, Frankfurt au Mam, 1982
10 Slefene, Rolf Peter, Fortschrrttsfemde? Oppositron gegen Technrk und Industrle von der Romantlk bu zur
Gegenwart, Beck Verlag, Munich, 1984
11 Huber, J , Human Ecology, Journal of Public and International Aflarrs 5(l), 122-132 (1984)
12 Stapledon, G , Human Ecology, Faber and Faber, London, 1964
13 Sargent, F , II, ed , Human Ecology, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1974
14 Marcuzn, G , Element1 dl Ecologca Umana, Patron, Bologna, 1976
15 Tourame, A , La Soc&+ Post-Industr~elle, Denoel, Pans, 1%9, Chaps IUIU2
16 Brand, K -W , Busser, D , and Rucht, D , Aufbruch m eme audere Gesellschafr, Campus, Frankfurt, New
York, 1986, pp 27ff and 269 ff, esp p 283
17 Huber, J , Die Alternanven der Alternat&ewegung, Rotbuch, Berlin, 1980.
18 Jenkins, J C , Resource Moblhzatlon Theory and the Study of So& Movements, Annual Review of
Socrology 9, 527-553 (1983)

Received 3 February 1988, revised 5 August 1988