A study by psychologists at the University of Sussex has found that as well as potentially changing the world, participation in protests and demonstrations is actually good for you.
This is one of the findings of a large-scale interview study led by Dr John Drury, Lecturer in Social Psychology, into protest crowds and social movements, often known as 'collective action'.
"Many published activist accounts refer to feelings of encouragement and confidence emerging from experiences of collective action," says Dr Drury. "But it is not always clear how and why such empowerment occurs, so we aimed to explain what factors within a collective action event contribute most to such feelings."
The study involved in-depth interviews with nearly 40 activists from a variety of backgrounds, in which over 160 experiences of collective action were described. The range of events described by interviewees included traditional marches, fox-hunt sabotages, anti-capitalist street parties, environmental direct actions, and industrial mass pickets.
"The main factors contributing to a sense of empowerment were the realization of the collective identity, the sense of movement potential, unity and mutual support within a crowd," says Dr Drury.
"However, what was also interesting was the centrality of emotion in the accounts. Empowering events were almost without exception described as joyous occasions. Participants experienced a deep sense of happiness and even euphoria in being involved in protest events. Simply recounting the events in the interview itself brought a smile to the faces of the interviewees."
Psychologists have become increasingly interested in the role of positive experiences and emotions not just in making people feel good but also in promoting psychological and physical health. Uplifting experiences are associated with a variety of indicators of well-being, such as speed of physiological recovery; ability to cope with physical stressors; and the reduction of pain, anxiety and depression.
"Collective actions, such as protests, strikes, occupations and demonstrations, are less common in the UK than they were perhaps 20 years ago," says Dr Drury. "The take-home message from this research therefore might be that people should get more involved in campaigns, struggles and social movements, not only in the wider interest of social change, but also for their own personal good."
Comments
do you know what proportion
do you know what proportion of the interviewees were "activistists" then? As opposed to people who have been on strikes or mass pickets?
If not, then your comment is pretty pointless. Unless you are saying that anyone who has ever been on strike is a mental "activistist".
I'm not surprised that you posted a comment like that, but when you actually think about it does this contradict your personal experience? Have you enjoyed going on mass demonstrations/riots? Have you ever been on strike? If so, did you enjoy it?
If you talk to lots of older people, and they mention involvement in some sort of social movement in the past, like quite a few people do nowadays about the miners strike, they recount happy times, the solidarity, fighting for something they believed in, etc.
weeler wrote: Quote: The
weeler
you're quoting a press release yeah? you know how these are written, industrial mass pickets are seen as old hat so they'd obviously emphasise the 'sexy' stuff. that said this was done (a) by Johnny and (b) in Brighton, so the activistist assumption isn't too far fetched.
weeler
right, so what about stuff that makes a difference, like picketing and winning a strike?
Quote: 4/5 activistist shite.
that was four out of the 5 activities mentioned - not 80% of the cases. Can you really not understand the difference?
In the rest of your post to go on to say that in fact the study does not contradict your personal experience. So again, what is your problem with it?
You also ignore the rest of my post.
I find your comparison of feelings from being involved in collective action with being a member of a leftist sect bizarre.
This study was carried out with a detailed set of interviews. And as you stated, also confirms your person experiences, as it does mine and those of many people I know.
What is the evidence behind your statement?
In fact, I would say that most people's person experiences and memories of being in a leftist sect are negative and alienating. This again is true in my case, and in the cases of many people I know. It would also seem to be backed up by the fact that far more people have left leftist sects than are in them.
I think these posts of yours are simply more reflections of your guilty ex-punk past, where you are feeling the excessive need to distance yourself from your previous role of twatty activistist.
To be fair, while I'm not
To be fair, while I'm not bothered either way, Steven is defending it based solely on the press release and it's not apparent anyone on here has read the actual study nor does it say where it was published.
I actually know a lot of
I actually know a lot of people who've been traumatized by police brutality in such "direct action", and I'd count myself as one. Also:
So, who's with me to join an angry mob then? I heard there's a lot of them damned immigrants about stealing our jobs.
Well isn't it obvious that
Well isn't it obvious that collective action (regardless of whether right or left wing for or how useful it ends up actually being) is likely to be psychologically good for you? Police brutality excluded, to state the even more obvious. This isn't supposed to be a moral statement so why bother condemning imaginary anti-immigrant actions?
Because ultimately they are
Because ultimately they are making a moral, pro-activistoid statement, by their choice of subject matter. Have they tried to interview lynch mob members, gang-rapists, etc? No, because that would expose this elation they've "discovered" for the base tribal urge it really is.
Nothing wrong with a "base"
Nothing wrong with a "base" (as in sinful?) tribal urge unless you are some kind of weird hyper-individualist elevated being without instincts, it's like condemning collective action because 'the nazis used it too'. And it's not 'pro-activistoid', it's a report of their observations.
"Observation," right, utterly
"Observation," right, utterly objective. If they'd said "acting as part of a mob is good for you", the reaction would have been entirely different, yet that, ultimately, is what their research would lead to taken to its scientific conclusion.
Steven wrote: do you know
Steven
If this is the paper which the press release is about, then it was almost exclusively activists:
Drury et al. (2005)
treeofjudas
Yes they have:
I humbly stand corrected,
I humbly stand corrected, then. Pays to actually look things up, eh? :oops:
actually if we're getting
actually if we're getting food later he's welcome to come along :)
Quote: Those most frequently
I'm not particularly fussed about this discussion, but you'd think they'd bother proofreading it a bit better. It's not like it's hard to check how you spell DSEi[/pedantry]
Quote: research has
ffffffffffffuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuccckkkkk