Re: Social Movements and Democratization

According to Tilly and Tarrow, a social movement consists of "a sustained campaign of claim making, using repeated performances that advertise the claim, based on organizations, networks, traditions, and solidarities that sustain these activities" (206). However, in the case of the Egyptian Workers' Movement, Joel Beinin and Marie Duboc believe this definition should be altered to encompass the "combination of an authoritarian state and . . . people who do not conceive of themselves as or aspire to be fully autonomous individuals detached from dense networks of families and friends" (206). This particular movement was not focused under one organizer or party, rather the collective action of different localized movements. As noted, "these grievances were a response to the ongoing restructuring of the political economy affecting workers throughout Egypt" (207). For example, President Anwar al-Sadat's 1974 economic policy allowing for the privatization of public sectors disenfranchised thousands of Egyptian workers as "managers of public sector firms slated for privatization typically made them more attractive to buyers by reducing the workforce before the sale" (211). 2004 saw a second round of privatization under Prime Minister Ahmad Nazif, totaling $5.34 billion (211). Collective action in response to privatization erupted in worker strikes at the Misir Spinning and Weaving Company after governmental promises regarding a salary increase were not met. The workers organized a 4-day strike which ended with an awarded bonus and "assurances that the company would not be privatized" (218). This strike sparked strikes across the country and the government conceded in nearly all cases. 

The prevalence of civil society within a nation is crucial to successful social movements. For example, before the Arab Spring, “Tunisia was held up as a positive example of ‘modernisation’ in the MENA region and its civil society was considered far more vibrant than in neighbouring states” (Härdig 36). While anti-colonial movements of the 1950s began to shift public opinion of the status quo in colonial society, postcolonial governmental relations within Tunisia began to turn Tunisia into an authoritarian society even after its independence. However, “because Tunisia had a historical precedence for state organisation and an active civil society role before independence, the state was never fully in control of the civil society space – trade unions, while operating in a corporate model as in Egypt, were much more autonomous from the state” (Härdig 37). Without the establishment of a cohesive civil society, MENA nations are unable to attain democratic participation.