New Social Movements and the New Class in the Netherlands
Author(s): Hanspeter Kriesi
Source: American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 94, No. 5 (Mar., 1989), pp. 1078-1116
Published by: The University of Chicago Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2780467 .
Accessed: 10/10/2013 12:44
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
American Journal of Sociology.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
New Social Movements and the New Class
in the Netherlands'
HanspeterKriesi
UniversityofGeneva
The class base of the so-callednew social movementsis analyzed
using data fromthe Dutch nationalelectionsurveyof 1986. This
analysisis linkedto thetheoryon the"new class," reconceptualized
as those in the new middle class who tryto defendtheirrelative
" The analautonomyagainsttheencroachment
ofthe"technocrats.
ysis shows that, althoughthe Dutch new social movementsare
supportedby broad segmentsof the population,theirinnercircles
are predominantly
constituted
by segmentsof thereconceptualized
new class: theyoungspecialistsin social and culturalservices,and
some of the youngadministrative
specialistsin public service.In
addition,theanalysisdocumentstheliberalizingeffectofeducation
fortheyoungercohortsand suggestsa profoundchangeofvalues in
the postwarperiod.
In theUnitedStates,theremarkabledegreeofliberalismand dissentthat
theeducatedmiddleclass has expressedsincethelate 1960sled a number
ofsocial thinkerswithdiversepoliticalorientations
to developa theoryof
a "new class." Accordingto thistheory,a new class of"knowledgeworkers" has embarkedon a struggleforpower and status against a stilldominant"old class" of businessownersand executives.Brint(1984) has
presenteda systematiccomparisonof different
conceptsof thenew class
and has testedempirically
thedegreeofliberalismofthegroupsidentified
undereach definition.
The debateon thenew class was, however,linked
only slightlyto the developmentof a numberof contemporary
social
movementsthathad a strongappeal to the educatedmiddleclass in the
1 This research
groupoftheDutchNationalElecuseddata suppliedbytheworking
ofRuudKoopmans,PhilipvanPraag,Jr.,
tionstudies(NKO). The helpfulcomments
as is thecodingassisacknowledged,
are gratefully
reviewers
and severalanonymous
shouldbe sentto HanspeterKriesi,
tanceofRuud Koopmans.Requestsforreprints
of Geneva,Case Postale266, CH-1227
of PoliticalScience,University
Department
Switzerland.
Carouge-Geneve,
? 1989by The University
ofChicago.All rightsreserved.
0002-9602/89/9405-0004$01.50
1078
AJS Volume 94 Number 5 (March 1989): 1078-1116
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
New Class
UnitedStatesand in Europe.2Undertheinfluence
oftheresourcemobilization approach,Americansocial movementsspecialistswere above all
concernedwith the strategicand organizationalaspects of movements.
The social-structural
base of contemporary
movementsreceivedmuch
less attention.
Analystsofsocial movementsin Europe weremoreconcernedwiththe
structurally
determinedgrowthof new protestpotentialsresultingfrom
thedevelopmentofWesternindustrialsociety.In contrastto theresource
mobilizationapproach,the European "new social movement"approach
(see Klandermans1986; Klandermansand Tarrow 1988; Melucci 1984)
soughtto explainnot how, but why,new movementsarise. This European approach stressedthat the new movements-such as the ecology
movement,the antinuclearmovement,the women's movement,the
peace movement,and the squatters'movement-differfromthe old
movements(the labor movementin particular)in values and issues,actionforms,and constituencies.
In contrastto theold labormovement,
the
new social movements(NSMs) have not primarilyarticulatedeconomic
demandsbut have been moreconcernedwithculturalissuesdealingwith
questionsof individualautonomyand withissues relatedto new, invisible risksaffectingpeople in more or less similarways, irrespective
of
theirsocial positions(Brand 1987). Althoughthe mobilizationprocesses
of theseNSMs have in generalbeen issue specific,theirchallengeshave
been intimatelyrelatedto one another.The different
movementshave
mobilizedthesame kindsof people, on thebasis of sharedgeneralvalue
fromthedominantones in Westernlibpatternsthatdiffersignificantly
eral democracies.3Insofaras the constituencies
of the NSMs have been
2
Gouldner (1979) is an exception in this regard. He explicitlymentionsthe ecology
movementand the women's movementas two of the arenas where the confrontation
between the new class and the old dominantclass is taking place. In a recentdiscussion of thefutureof social movements,Zald (1987, p. 328) also brieflyrefersto the new
class. In contrastto Gouldner, he thinksit hard to believe thatthe new class represents
a base for any substantial social movement. Instead, it is, according to him, more
likely to be a base for expressive styles,not systematicpolicies and ideological programs. Such an opinion is not unique to American theorists.Bourdieu (1982), e.g.,
maintains that personalizing, psychologizing,and moralizing replace politicizingin
what he calls the "new petit bourgeoisie."
3 Parkin (1968, pp. 21-31) noted the "alienation" fromdominantvalues of activistsin
the BritishCampaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND). Later studies confirmedhis
results: Cotgrove and Duff (1980, 1981), e.g., pointed out how supportersof the
environmentalmovement oppose the dominant value of "economic individualism."
The pronouncedpostmaterialismof those engaged in or closelyassociated with NSMs
has been documented by a number of studies (see below). Moreover, supportersof
NSMs typicallytendto identifywithleftistor center-Leftpositionsand preferGreen or
Leftist parties in all Western European countries, with the exception of Belgium
(Miuller-Rommel1984, 1985; Kriesi and van Praag, Jr., 1987).
1079
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AmericanJournalof Sociology
describedin termsof class locations,observershave agreed that their
mobilizationpotentialis primarilylocated in parts of the new middle
class. Several empiricalstudiesfromdifferent
European countrieshave
supportedthe view thatNSMs are above all instancesof "middleclass
radicalism"(see Byrne 1986; Cotgroveand Duff 1981; Diani and Lodi
1988; Kriesi 1985; Parkin 1968). The European discussionof the NSMs
has, however,notbeenlinkedexplicitly
to theAmericandiscussionofthe
new class. This paper is an attemptto linkthetwo strandsof theoryby
showingthe relevanceof the new class forthe mobilizationof Dutch
NSMs.
THE "NEW MIDDLE CLASS" AND THE "NEW CLASS"
To understandthe social structuralbases of supportforNSMs, I begin
with a briefgeneralconceptualizationof the class structureof modern
Westernsocietiesand specifymyuse of theallegedly"muddledconcept"
(Bell 1979) of the new class. To do so, I make use of Wright's(1985)
construction
of classes. Wrightdefinesclasses on the basis of theireffectivecontroloverproductiveassets.He refersto threetypesofsuchassets:
assets in the means of production,organizationalassets, and skill/
credentialassets. The ownersof the means of productionconstitutethe
bourgeoisie/old
middleclass. Those who do not own any means of productionare dividedintotwobroad classes-the new middleclass and the
workingclass. Justlike the workingclass, the new middleclass is excluded fromownershipof the means of production.In contrastto the
workingclass, however,the new middle class exertssome measureof
effective
controlover organizationalor skillsassets. The relativesize of
the new middle class depends on the level of organizationaland skills
in thenew middleclass. Following
assetsthatis requiredformembership
Wright,the level of skillsrequiredformembershipin the new middle
class is setin sucha way thatthisclass includesnotonlyprofessionals
but
also semiprofessionals
and highlyqualifiedcraftworkers.4Similarly,the
4 Not all occupations
requiresa realtechnical
can be professions.
A strongprofession
resultsand can onlybe taught.Thustheskillcan be
skillthatproducesdemonstrable
enoughto
monopolized
bycontrolling
whowillbe trained.The skillmustbe difficult
requiretraining
and reliableenoughto produceresults.But it cannotbe tooreliable,
bytheir
forthenoutsiderscan judge workby itsresultsand controlitspractitioners
are occupations
thatmake
judgment(see Collins1979,pp. 132 ff.).Semiprofessions
buthavebeenunableto secure
claimsto rewardson thebasisofformalqualifications
fullprofessional
a legalmonopoly
or controloverthenumber
closurebyestablishing
and qualityof entrants(Parkin1979,p. 102). Teachersare a typicalexampleof a
semiprofession.
1080
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
New Class
level oforganizationalassetsrequiredis setto includenotonlymanagers
but also supervisorsof all sortsin the new middleclass.5
These threebroad classescan be further
subdividedaccordingto additionalcriteria.I willfocushereon thesubdivisionswithinthenewmiddle
class, because the new class is generallythoughtto be part of the new
middle class and because it is to here that we expectthe mobilization
potentialof theNSMs to have itsstructural
roots.Firstofall, withinthe
new middleclass we can distinguishbetweenthosewho have organizationalassets at theirdisposal and thosewho do not. As Freidson(1986,
p. 152) has argued most convincingly,a basic antagonismof interest
existsbetweenmanagersand the professionalrank and filebecause the
formerare essentiallyconcernedwiththepreservation
of
of theintegrity
the organization(or organizationalunit)as a whole,whilethe latterare
concernedwiththe preservationof the integrity
of theirspecializedpursuitof a disciplineor a profession.6
This antagonismbetweenwhatwe couldcall the"technocrats"
and the
professional"specialists"overlapswitha seconddivisionwithinthenew
middle class, the one constitutedby different
occupationalsegments.
There are importantdifferences
betweenoccupationalsegmentsin the
degreeto whichtheirpractitioners
are orientedtowardthe preservation
and integrity
of the organizationsto which theybelong. Some occupationalspecialtiesare rathermore"technocratic"
thanothers,in thatthe
typeofknowledgeat thedisposaloftheirpractitioners
is moreinstrumental to therunningof organizationsthanthatof others.The practitioners
of some occupationalspecialtiestypicallyare moreorientedtowardrunningthe administration
of the large-scaleorganizationsof modernsociety,while otherstypicallyare moreclientorientedor moreorientedtoward the body of knowledgeof the disciplinestheybelongto.
I suggestmakingdistinctionsamong fivedifferent
occupationalsegmentsin orderto allow fora moredetailedanalysisof the ideal-typical
5 Delimitedin thisway,thenew middleclass also containswhathas beencalledthe
"new workingclass." The conceptof the new workingclass has not enteredinto
discussions
aboutthenewclassintheUnitedStates.It has,however,playeda considerablerolein earlierFrenchdiscussions(see Mallet 1963;Touraine1971).Together
withtechnicalspecialists,
technically
trainedmanualworkersand supervisors
on the
shopfloorwerethought
to forma new working
classforwhichissuesofcontroland
alienation,i.e., theissuesposedbyNSMs, wereassumedto be moresalientthanfor
ordinary
workers.
6 Freidson
contrasts
theinterests
of"managing
professionals"
withthoseof"rank-andfileprofessionals,"
but his argument
can be generalizedto an antagonism
between
managersand rank-and-file
professionals,
becauseit is precisely
Freidson'sargument
thatmanagingprofessionals
tendto developorientations
and commitments
similarto
thoseofmanagers.
1081
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AmericanJournalof Sociology
distinctionbetweentechnocratsand specialists.The occupationalsegmentthatcomesclosestto theideal-typeofthespecialistsis thecategory
of"socialand culturalspecialists."This categoryincludessemiprofessionin medicalservices,teaching,social work,artsand
als and professionals
journalism,and othersocial and culturalspecialists.The otherfourcatecharacter.The seggoriesare all supposed to have a moretechnocratic
mentof "administrative
and commercialpersonnel"includesmanagers,
and commercial
economistsand lawyers,and administrative
professional
employeeswithsomemeasureofskillor organizationalcontrolin private
in this
and publicorganizations.Althoughthemanagersare concentrated
category,in the otherfourwe also findpersonswho controlorganizationalassets,because controlofsuchassetshas notbeen used fordefining
occupationalsegments.The "technicalspecialists"segmentis made up of
technicalspecialistsproper:technicalpersonnel,engineers,naturalscienwho forma large,
tists,and of computerspecialistsand programmers,
subgroupwithinthissegment."Craftspecialists"
mainlysemiprofessional
trainedmanualworkincludeshighlyqualifiedcraftworkers,technically
ers, and supervisorson the shop floor.Togetherwith the categoryof
the new
technicalspecialists,the categoryof craftspecialistsconstitutes
services"-policemen,
workingclass. Finally,thecategoryof"protective
personnel-is includedto accountfora
military
firemen,
and professional
groupthatis involvedin the "runningof the system"in a veryspecial
way. Even iftheydo notholdorganizationalassets,agentsspecializedin
social controlor defense,just as managers,tendto be concernedessenof the organizationalunit
tiallywith the preservationand the integrity
theyare workingfor.7
In myview, it is the specialistswho formthe new class, and it is the
thestrucand specialiststhatconstitutes
antagonismbetweentechnocrats
we also need to
of the class structure,
7 To arriveat a completeconceptualization
fortheothertwoclasses-ownersofthemeansofproducsomedistinctions
introduce
ofthe
ofownership
class. GiventhatI tooktheMarxistcriterion
tionand theworking
thetraditional,
pointfortheconceptualization,
as thestarting
meansof production
arenottakentobe partof
(doctorsand lawyersespecially)
professionals
self-employed
orof
to be partoftheclassofthebourgeoisie
thenewmiddleclassbutare considered
amongtheownersofthemeansofproduction
theold middleclass.A secondcategory
highpotential
Theyhave oftenbeensaid to have a relatively
consistsofthefarmers.
and therestofthe
forsupporting
NSMs (see,e.g., Offe1985).The "largeemployers"
oftheownersofthemeansofproducformthelasttwocategories
"petitbourgeoisie"
is used
workers
and white-collar
betweenblue-collar
distinction
tion.The traditional
betweenworkingclass and middleclass butto subdividethe
herenotto distinguish
a further
workers,
categories.Amongtheblue-collar
workingclass intoappropriate
distinction
is madebetweenskilledand unskilledworkers.Takingourlead fromthe
to have a high
professionals
we would expectthe traditional
new class literature,
oftheownersofthemeansofproducforNSMs butnottheothersegments
potential
tionor oftheworkingclass.
1082
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
New Class
turalbasis forits formation.
The NSMs are one ofthearenasofconfrontationbetweenthesetwo campsin thenew middleclass, and thepolitical
strugglesoftheNSMs can be thoughtof as contributing
to theformation
of the new class.
Several of the alreadycited empiricalstudiespointin thisdirection.
Brint's(1984) analysisof theliberalpoliticalattitudesofU.S. professionals has shownthatthe new middleclass does notgenerallyhave oppositionalviews. He founda significant
splitbetweenthesocial and cultural
specialistsand the threeotheroccupationalsegmentsdistinguishedby
" the"humanserviceprofessionals,
" and
him-the "technicalprofessionals,
"8 The first
the"managers.
provedto be muchmoreliberalthanthethree
othercategories.The splithe discoveredcorresponds
to Gouldner's(1979)
divisionbetween"humanisticintellectuals"and "technicalintelligentsia"
as two definablesegmentsof the new class. Gouldner,however,downplayed the significanceof this split,maintainingthatthe two segments
had commoninterests
based on theircommoncontrolof"culturalcapital"
and the cultureof criticaldiscoursehe thoughttheyshared.9
Parkin's(1968) perceptivestudyoftheoccupationalcompositionofthe
supportersof the BritishCampaignforNuclear Disarmament(CND) in
the 1960s pointsin a similardirection.He made a distinctionbetween
professionals
who are engagedin the"welfareand creativeprofessions"forexample,social work,medicalservices,teaching,thechurch,journalism, art, architecture,
scientific
research,and so on-and professionals
who are engagedin theworldofbusinessand commerce.His categoryof
welfareand creativeprofessionsroughlycorrespondsto my categoryof
social and culturalspecialists.As he had expected,he foundtheheaviest
ofCND supporters
concentration
in theprofessional
welfareand creative
occupations,withteachingas the dominantexample.Byrne(1986), in a
replicationof Parkin'sstudy,showsthattheCND oftheearly1980swas
stillmainlycarriedbythesame occupationalgroups.In a studyofBritish
of"socialandculturalspecialmorerestricted
definition
ists."He definesthemas academics,nonacademicsocialscientists,
artsand culture
professionals,
architects,
clergy,and traditional
professionals
(primarily
doctorsand
lawyers)workingin thepublicand nonprofit
sectors.The threeothersegments
are
defined
as follows:The "managerial"
groupincludesall salariedmanagers."Technical
professionals"
includeall businesseconomicspecialists,engineers,
college-graduate
technicians,
private-sector
doctorsand lawyers,and nonacademic
scientists.
Finally,
"humanserviceprofessionals"
includethelower-status
"helpingprofessions"
ofteaching,socialwork,librarianship,
nursing,and healththerapy.My category
of "social
and culturalspecialists"roughlycorresponds
to thecombination
of Brint's"human
serviceprofessionals"
and "socialand culturalspecialists."
9 As is notedalso byBrint(1984,p. 44), other
observers
haveemphasized
thesignificanceofthissplit.He explicitly
mentions
Galbraithand Bell,whonotedthecultural
dissimiliarities
betweenthetechnicaland "literary"
intelligentsia.
8 Brint(1984,pp. 45 ff.)has a
1083
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AmericanJournalof Sociology
environmentalists,
Cotgroveand Duff (1981) indicatethat a littleless
than half of them(43%) come from"service,welfareand creative"occupations.
To explain why thereshould be such a clusteringof "middle class
radicals"in thisparticularsegmentof occupations,Parkinsuggeststhat
middle-classradicals are highlyselectivein theirchoicesof occupation,
and thewelfareand creativeprofessions
providethekindofenvironment
These occupations,he goes
mostamenableto theirpoliticalorientations.
on, providea kindof"sanctuary"forthemiddle-classradicalswherethey
are able to escape directimplicationin capitalisteconomicrelationsand
wheretheyseem to be able to withstandthe pressuresforpoliticalconof Brint'sresults,
to some extent.In a recentreinterpretation
formity
Lamont(1987) arguesin a similarvein. She suggeststhatpoliticalliberalknowlof a professional's
ism varies inverselywiththe instrumentality
edge to profitmaximizationand withthedirectdependenceof a professional'sjob on profitmaximization.Jobsin thepublicsectorshe considers
to be less directlydependenton profitmaximization.On thebasis ofboth
criteria,we would expectsocial and culturalspecialiststo be relatively
instrumental
liberal,because notonlyis theirknowledgenotimmediately
to profitmaximization,but also theyare almostexclusivelyemployedby
public or semipublicinstitutions-atleast in theNetherlands."0
Apartfromputtingtoo muchemphasison selectionmechanismsat the
expenseof mechanismsof socializationon the job," these discussions
remaintoo rootedin the realmof marketrelations.In myview, it is not
the instrumentality
of knowledgeto profitmaximizationthatis decisive
forthe politicalliberalism/radicalism
of certainpartsof the new middle
10
Lamont (1987) thinksthat the new class theoryshould not be rejected but rather
focused on the opposition between relativelyautonomous "knowledge workers"and
business interests.In her view, it is in the interestof these relativelyautonomous
"knowledge workers" to maintain and increase their autonomy and to expand the
nonprofitrealm by encouraging the development of the public sector. For a similar
treatmentof the new class, see McAdam (1987), who definesthe new class as thatwing
of the "knowledge elite" whose objective class interestsare served by the expansion of
government.
" Social and cultural specialists not only select theirprofessionin part for political
reasons, but, once workingin theirprofession,theywill also be socialized by theirjob
experiencesin a way that differsfromthe socialization undergoneby practitionersof
other specialties. Thus, the radicalism of social and cultural specialists may be enhanced by the specificcharacterof theirrelationsto clients.These professionalsare in
directcontact with theirclients,and theydepend on the cooperationof theirclientsto
provide theirservices (Funk et al. 1984, p. 276). A teacher, can transmitknowledge
only if his studentsare prepared to learn. Because of this relativelyintimaterelationship betweentheseprofessionalsand theirclients,theyoftenbecome advocates oftheir
clients'interests.Such an advocative stance may, of course, also be one of the reasons
why professionalpositions in these fieldshad been chosen in the firstplace.
1084
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
New Class
class, but the instrumentality
of knowledgeto therunningof large-scale
organizationsin general.This criterionimpliesan oppositionofinterests
between,on the one hand, the technocratsin privateenterprisesand
public bureaucracieswho tryto manage theirorganizationsmost efficientlyand, on theotherhand,thespecialistswho tryto defendtheirown
and theirclients'relativeautonomyagainsttheinterventions
ofthe"technostructure."
Ideal-typically,
it is thespecialistsin theprivateand in the
publicsphereswho constitutethenew class and who mobilizein NSMs.
CLASS AND DEMOGRAPHIC/RESIDENTIAL
CHARACTERISTICS
In theirstrongversion,class hypothesesmaintainthe centrality
of class
forthe determination
of social and politicalconflict.In general,thisis
increasingly
seen as an implausibleproposition,and thereare a number
of theoreticalargumentsthatsuggest,also withrespectto the mobilization of NSMs, that social-structural
otherthan the new
characteristics
class may play the decisiverole. The firstargumentto be consideredis
one thatpointsto generalprocessesofsocial changeas causingthedissolutionof traditionalsocial ties to families,religiousgroups,and class.
Urbanization,improvedtransportation
facilities,a more cosmopolitan
communicationssystem,and successiveimprovements
in physicaland
economicsecurity(as a resultoftherisinglevelofgeneralwelfareand the
developmentof the welfarestate) have liberatedthe individualfrom
traditionalbonds and have permittedan unprecedented
degreeof individual autonomy.In the Netherlands,the processof the dissolutionof
traditionalbonds has come to be known as "depillarization."Traditionally,Dutch societyhas been characterizedby a highdegreeof segmentationbased on religiousand sociopoliticalcriteria.Since thesecond
halfofthe 1960s,individualloyaltiesto the"pillars"have generallybeen
greatlyattenuated.2 This is documentedby theveryhighdegreeof secularizationcharacteristic
of Dutch societytoday. By 1986, fully44% of
the national sample (see below) reportedno religiousaffiliation.'3We
12
At thesametime,however,theorganizational
structure
ofthepillarshas notbeen
completely
dismantled
but has retainedan unusualrelevancein Dutchsociety.The
Christianpartieshave been in power-in varyingcoalitions-uninterruptedly
since
theend oftheFirstWorldWar,and today'sChristian
Democratsare stillthemajor
party.Moreover,as is pointedout by Scholten(1986,p. 21), manyof theessential
elements
ofstructural
pillarization
in thehumanservicesector,i.e., thesectorwhere
thesocialand culturalspecialistsare employed,did notdisappear.Thus,theschool
system
is stillorganizedalongpillarizedlines,and thesameis to a considerable
extent
stilltrueoftheDutchsystemoftelecommunications.
13 As Sasaki and Suzuki (1987) have shown,Dutch society
has undergone
a longlastingprocessofsecularization
duringwhichtheDutchhavegradually
beengivingup
religiousaffiliation.
Unfortunately,
thetime-series
data of Sasaki and Suzukiend in
1085
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AmericanJournalof Sociology
would expectthe liberatingeffectsof thesestructuralprocessesto have
been greatestamong the youngergenerations,especiallyamong those
who have been socialized politicallyafterthe processof depillarization
has startedto develop its full force.Those liberatedfromtraditional
ofNSMs,
bonds,in turn,can be expectedto be themostlikelysupporters
movementsthatare, amongotherthings,mobilizingpreciselyto extend
the autonomyof the individualand to defendit againstnew formsof
hierarchicalcontrolin ever more complex bureaucraticorganizations
(Beck 1983, 1986; Brand 1985). This argumentsuggeststhat age and
of supportforNSMs, with
religiousaffiliation
are strongdeterminants
bothhavingnegativeeffectson such support.14
A similarargumentis based on Inglehart's(1971,1977) theorythatthe
risinglevelofwelfarein thepostwarperiodhas caused a shiftin thevalue
prioritiesof the youngergenerationssocializedafterthe war. According
on
generallyplace a higherpriority
to thistheory,theyoungergenerations
values thando thosesocializeddurnonmaterialist
(or "postmaterialist")
ingtheperiodsofthedepressionsor thewar, whenmaterialscarcitywas
values, however,are prea real threatformostpeople. Postmaterialist
ciselythe values articulatedby NSMs or partiesclose to these movements,as has been documentedby a numberof studies(Burklin1982,
1984; Fietkau et al. 1982; Inglehart1981; Muller-Rommel1982, 1985;
Reuband 1985). On the basis of thisreasoning,too, we would expectthe
youngergenerations
to be generallymorelikelyto mobilizein NSMs than
the olderones, irrespective
of class.
A thirdlineofreasoningrelatestheprotestoftheNSMs to theliberalizing effectsof education. Parkin (1968) attributedthe radicalismof the
educated middle class in part to this liberalizingeffectof education.
fivetypesof
Accordingto Brint(1984, p. 61), sociologistshave identified
effectsthatmay contributeto the netassociationof educationand politdifferbackgroundand personality
ical liberalism.Exceptforpreexisting
to someextent,thetendencyof
ences,theeducationvariablemayreflect,
theeducatedto be integratedintomoresophisticated,
cosmopolitan,and
criticalcommunications
networks;it may reflectthe directtransmission
of liberal and dissentingideas fromteachersto students;and it may
indicatethe directeffectsof collegeon cognitivedevelopment.In addi1969, i.e., just at the moment when the process of depillarizationdeveloped its full
force.Accordingto theirfigures,religiousnonaffiliation
had reached only23% in 1969,
which means that nonaffiliationhas approximatelydoubled in the less than 20 years
since.
14 One mightadd that the young generallyhave been shown to have a higherpotential
to participatein unconventionalpolitical activitiesin different
Westernliberal democracies, irrespectiveof the type of goals involved (Barnes, Kaase, et al. 1979).
1086
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
New Class
tion,theexpansionof theeducationalsystemin thepostwarperiodmay
be thoughtto have contributed
to thetendencyofthehighereducatedto
become politicallymore radical in yet anotherway. As Schumpeter
([1942] 1962,pp. 145 ff.)suggestedin his sociologyoftheintellectual,an
imbalance between the expansion of the educational systemand the
growthof the occupationalsystemmay lead to an oversupplyof the
highlyqualified.In sucha situation,manyofthemwillbe unemployed
or
will be forcedto accept mediocrework, which servesto increasetheir
dissatisfaction
withtheirworkingconditions,in particular,and with"the
system,"in general.In fact,it is to thistypeof relativedeprivationthat
Alber (1985) attributesthe large measure of supportthat the German
Greensfindamongtheyoung,highlyeducated.Followingthisreasoning,
we would expecta particularly
highlevel of supportforNSMs notonly
among the youngand among the highlyeducated but also among the
unemployedand amongtoday'sstudentswho belongto a cohortoffuture
professionals
withparticularly
poor employment
prospects.
Finally,the protestof NSMs may be relatedto gender."One of the
mostthoroughly
substantiated"findingsof the social sciences(Milbrath
1981,p. 228) has been thatmen are morelikelyto participatein politics
thanwomen.More recently,
however,ithas beenarguedthatthisfinding
is muchless applicableto new, unconventional
formsof politics(Lovenduski 1986, p. 126).15
Althoughall these alternativehypothesesserve to underminethe
strongversionoftheclass hypothesis,
noneofthemis completelyincompatiblewitha versionof the class hypothesisthatholdsthattheantagonismbetweenspecialistsand technocrats
is one amongseveralimportant
determinants
of mobilizationin NSMs. As in thecase of politicalliberalismin theUnitedStatesstudiedbyBrint(1984),theeffectofthedifferent
large-scaleprocessesof social changeon supportforNSMs may not be
exclusive,but cumulative.That is, we would expect each one of the
different
social-structural
characteristics
introducedhereas indicatorsof
theselarge-scaleprocessesto have a significant
effecton thepotentialfor
NSMs.
The different
social-structural
characteristics
may, however,combine
in yetanotherway to have an effecton the supportof NSMs: theymay
interactwitheach other.To understandthisinteractionmorefully,we
shouldfirstnotethatthe expansionof the categoryof thespecialistshas
takenplace onlyrecently
and has notoccurredindependently
ofthelargescale processesofsocial changecapturedby thevariablesage, education,
15 Barnes, Kaase, et al. (1979, p. 110) have shownthat,especiallyamongyoung
women,directactionis morepopularthanconventional
formsof politicalinvolvement.
1087
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AmericanJournalof Sociology
TABLE
PERCENTAGE
ECONOMICALLY
OF "PROFESSIONAL,
ACTIVE
POPULATION
Country
1
AND RELATED
TECHNICAL
IN WESTERN
LIBERAL
WORKERS"
DEMOCRACIES:
OF
1960-1985
1960
1970
1980
1985
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Sweden
.1................
.
Denmark .7.8
.0
Norway ................
. .............
Netherlands
Finland ................
.2
19.2
12.2
12.3
13.3
11.9
25.8
17.0
18.6
17.3
17.0
29.6
21.5
21.1
18.7
... *
6.
7.
8.
9.
United Kingdom .8.6
.8.9
United States ...........8.8
Ireland
.................
15.9
15.1
15.0
12.9
... *
... *
.
11.1
12.1
13.8
9.3
11.4
9.8
8.7
13.4
... *
14.8
14.3
14.1
13.9
13.1
5.5
7.3
5.7
6.6
11.5
9.4
9.0
4.1
5.5
... *
... *
10.1
9.0
2.7
3.6
6.7
Switzerland
10. France.9.1................
11. Germany .7.6
12. Austria
1
.................
13. Italy ....................
14. Greece ..................
15. Japan ..................
16. Spain ..................
17. Portugal ........
.
.......
... *
7.2
...
*
SOURCE.-InternationalLabor Office:Year Book of Labor Statistics,Geneva.
* No information.
If therewas no information
forthe year in questionbut information
on a year
in thetableforthe
betweenthetwo reference
yearsused forthetable,I have includedthatinformation
yearforwhichtherewas no information
(e.g., thepercentageforJapangivenfor1960is actuallytheone
for1965, theyear closestto 1960 forwhichinformation
was available in the Year Books used).
and religiousaffiliation.
To give an indicationof the size of thisrecent
expansion,table 1 comparesthe growthin the percentageof "professional, technicaland relatedworkers"from1960 to 1985 fordifferent
Westernliberal democracies.The occupationalcategoriesused in this
table are fromthe InternationalLabor Officeand are, of course, not
identicalto theclassifications
used here.Nevertheless,
thecategoryofthe
"professional,technicaland relatedworkers"comes close to the sum of
thecategoriesof thetechnicalspecialistsand thesocial and culturalspecialistsused here. This table makes it clear that this categoryhas expanded in everycountryover the past 25 years. In the Netherlandsin
particular,it has roughlydoubled. No othercategoryhas increasedthat
muchin thiscountryover the same period,whiletheshareof the traditional proletariathas been almosthalved over the same periodof time
(from42.5% in 1960 to 23% in 1985). It is importantto notethat,as a
resultof its recentexpansion,this categoryis above all composed of
relativelyyoungpeople.
1088
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
New Class
It is significant
thatthecountriesin thefirstgroupin table 1 are also the
ones withthe mosthighlydevelopedwelfarestates.The riseof the welfarestatehas paralleledtheexpansionof theeducationalsystemand has
providedjob opportunities
foran increasingnumberof professionals,
in
particularforthe categoryof the social and culturalspecialists.At the
same time,professionals
also have foundan increasingnumberofopportunitiesin largeprivatecorporations.As a consequenceofsuch developments(whichcannot,of course,be dealt withherein moredetail),the
typical"professional"no longeris a self-employed
individualsellinghis
servicesto an individualclient.As we shall see, the "traditionalprofessionals"are numerically
a comparatively
insignificant
partofthepopulation as a whole. The typicalprofessionaltoday is employedby a large
organization,whichreduceshis individualmarketpowerand his autonomyconsiderably(Freidson1986).16 This is particularly
trueoftherankand-file(semi-)professionals.
What is more,thesheernumberofthenew
professionalsin today's societyhas reducedthe marketpower and the
correspondingstatus of the individual professional.The "inflationary
struggleforcredentials"(Collins 1979) and the concomitantstruggleof
the credentialedforoccupationalpositionshave changedtheirobjective
situationfundamentally.
It is again importantto notethatabove all the
youngergenerations
ofprofessionals
have beenaffectedbythesechanges.
This means that thereare structuralreasons why the interestsof the
youngergenerationsof (semi-)professionalsin general,and of (semi-)
professionalsin the social and culturalservicesin particular,should be
different
fromthoseoftheiroldercolleagues.We should,in otherwords,
expectan interactionbetweenclass and age, withthe new class developingitsfulleffectonlyin theyoungergenerations
ofthosebornafterthe
war. 17
Afterdiscussingthe operationalizations
and the bivariaterelationship
betweenclass structurallocationsand the potentialfor NSMs, I will
presentthe resultsof multivariateanalysesthatshow how the different
social-structural
characteristics
combineto explainsupportforNSMs.
DATA AND METHODS
The data forthisstudyare takenfromtheDutch nationalelectionsurvey,
which was conductedin two waves, beforeand afterthe last parlia16
Starr(1982,p. 24) remarkswithregardto themedicalprofession:
"One reasonthat
theprofession
coulddevelopmarketpowerof thiskindwas thatit sold itsservices
to individualpatientsratherthanorganizations."
primarily
17 Inglehart
(1981,p. 895) impliessuchan interaction
betweenage and classwhenhe
suggests
thattheriseofpostmaterialism
inthepostwarperiodhas beena majorfactor
behindtheemergence
ofthenew class.
1089
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AmericanJournalof Sociology
class location
mentaryelectionsin spring1986. The questionsconcerning
were asked in the firstwave, whichincluded1,630 respondents.These
questionsbelong to the standardpart of the questionnaire,which had
alreadybeen used in earlierstudies.The questionsregardingNSMs were
asked in the second wave and were answeredby 1,357 of the original
ofclass structure
discusstheoperationalization
respondents.I will briefly
and of supportforNSMs.
If one wantsto operationalizeclass location,thefirstproblemthathas
to be solved is thatnoteverybodyhas a job; thatis, thereare manywho
do not controlany productiveassets at all. There are thosewho do not
out of work,and thosewho
work anymore,thosewho are temporarily
have neverworked.Thus, roughlyonlyhalf(48%) of the sampleof the
Dutch populationwas employedat the timeof the interview.To solve
thisproblem,I followedthe generalpracticeof traditionalstratification
theory(see Mann 1986). I decided to use the householdas the unit of
analysisand to code theclass locationof a respondenton thebasis ofthe
18
present(thelast)job of thehead of thehousehold(the"breadwinner").
To distinguishthe new middleclass fromthe bourgeoisieand the old
middleclass, on theone hand, and fromtheworkingclass, on theother,I
operationalizedthethreetypesof productiveassets,followingthelead of
has been treatedas the criterionfor
Wright(1985). Self-employment
"ownershipofmeansofproduction";largeemployersare definedas those
with 10 or more employees.The only directquestion in the election
studiesdealingwithorganizationalassets asked whetherthe respondent
had authorityover othersor not. Those who said that theydid were
consideredto be at least supervisors.Fromamongthisgroup,thosewith
thatis, themanagers,weredistinguished
authority,
real decision-making
assets
on thebasis ofan inspectionofoccupationaltitles.Skills/credential
were operationalizedon the basis of formaleducationalcredentialsand
an inspectionof occupationaltitles.In the case of obviousdiscrepancies
theoccupationaltitlewas decibetweenthe two sourcesof information,
sive. For example,a university
graduatewho drivesa taxi was coded as
an ordinarytaxi driver.Three levels of skills were distinguished:the
18 This procedure
also providesa feasible,ifnotentirely
solutionforthe
satisfactory,
householdswithmorethanone employedperson.In suchcases,it is unsatisfactory
partlybecauseitdoesnottakeintoaccountthecontrol
overproductive
assetsofall the
personsemployed.The procedure
useddoesnot,however,providea solution
forthose
households
wherethehead ofthehouseholdhimself
has neverworked.In thesecases
(6.7% ofmysample),theclasslocationassignedis thatofthefather
oftherespondent.
This construction
has drawbacksofitsown,becauseas a resultofit,thegroupofthe
households
witha breadwinner
whohas neverworkedturnsoutto be disproportionatelycomposedof respondents
of upper/upper-middle-class
origin.Wright(1985,
p. 160)avoidsall theseintricate
problemsbyanalyzingonlya sampleoftheworking
laborforce.
1090
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
New Class
"mediumlevel" presupposedat least medium-levelvocationaltraining;
the "highlevel," high-levelvocationaltrainingor university
education;
the"low level"includedeverything
else. The new middleclass was, then,
definedas includingall thoseemployeeswho are at least supervisorsor
have at least an occupationrequiringmedium-leveleducation.The coding of the occupationalsegmentson the basis of occupationaltitleswas
straightforward.
To operationalizesupportof NSMs, I used the Eurobarometerquestions about sympathywith and participationin NSMs (see MullerRommel 1985). Respondentswere asked whetherthey had "much,"
"some,")or "no" sympathywithfivedifferent
NSMs-the ecologymovement, the antinuclearmovement,the women's movement,the peace
movement,and the squatters'movement.Then theywere asked, for
everyone ofthesefivemovements,whethertheyhad "everparticipated"
in it, whethertheywere "ready to participate"in it, or whetherthey
"would never participate"in such a movement.These two questions
permitthe identification
of severallevels of mobilizationpotentials.The
broadestpossiblepotentialof a movementconsistsof all thosewho feel
"much" sympathyfor it. A more restrictedlevel of potentialincludes
everyonewho not only feelssympathybut also is readyto participate.
And, on an even more limitedand morereliablelevel, the potentialis
constituted
by thosewhose readinessto participateis confirmed
by their
havingalreadyparticipatedin the movement.On the basis of thesetwo
questionsI have, finally,constructeda summaryindex forthe overall
mobilizationpotentialforNSMs in the followingstraightforward
manner:a respondentreceivedtwo pointsforeverymovementforwhichhe
felt"much"sympathy
and anothertwopointsforeverymovementhe had
"ever participated"in. For everymovementforwhicha respondentfelt
"some" sympathy,he receivedone point and anotherpoint for every
movementhe was "ready"to participatein. The summaryindex has a
rangefrom0 to 20, giventhatthereare fivepossiblemovements.
The chances of our findinga large numberof activistsof NSMs in a
representative
nationalsurveysuch as the one used hereare, of course,
rathersmall. We will getan idea primarily
oftheclass composition
ofthe
outercirclesofthesympathizers
of,and the(potential)participants
in,the
movementsconsidered.For thepeace movement,it is possible,however,
to presentdata on a sample of core activistswho wereinterviewedwith
writtenquestionnairesin fall 1985,thatis, halfa yearbeforethenational
surveyused here.19
19Theseactivists
comefromsixselectedlocationsin theNetherlands,
buttheycan be
considered
as representative
of thepeace movement
activistsin thiscountry.For a
fullerdescription
of this sampleof peace movementactivists,see Kriesiand van
Praag,Jr.(1987)and Kriesi(1988).
1091
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AmericanJournalof Sociology
TABLE 2
OVERALL
MOBILIZATION
POTENTIAL
ClassLocation
FOR
Whole
Sample
NSMs: AVERAGE INDEX VALUES
Sample
without Private Public
N
Special Wage
Wage
(whole
Casest Earners Earners sample)
Bourgeoisie/old
middleclass:
4.3
5.0
6.8
9.6
4.2
4.7
6.6
8.9
...
...
...
...
...
New middleclass:
5. Protectiveservices ............2.2
6. Craftspecialists ..............6.
7. Technical specialists6
...........5.5
6
8. Administrative/commercial. .....6.
5.2
6.5
6.4
6.4
...
6.5
7.1
6.1
5.2
7.2
5.3
7.4
8.3
9.1
10.4
... *
...*
... *
8.4
9.2
10.3
37
66
43
6.9
6.6
5.8
6.7
1,068
7.3
6.7
5.8
6.3
795
6.6
6.4
6.7
7.6
395
161
141
138
1.
2.
3.
4.
Farmers ..........
...........
Large employers ......
........
Petit bourgeoisie ......
........
Traditional professions ........
9. Medical services .8.4
Teaching ....................
Other social/cultural
9.1
. ...........3.3
0
Workingclass:
10. Lower-levelemployee .....
.... 6.9
11. Skilledworkers......
.........
6.7
12. Unskilledworkers ......
......
5.9
6.8
Overall averages....................
N .............................
1,130
...
...
...
38
22
83
8
25
106
66
196
* Notsufficient
cases.
seen. 3.
headsofhouseholds
whohaveneverbeenemployed;
t Samplewithout
THE OVERALL MOBILIZATION POTENTIAL
FOR NEW SOCIAL MOVEMENTS
Column 1 in table 2 presentstheoverallmobilizationpotentialforNSMs
of the different
class locations.If we firstturnour attentionto the new
middle class, we immediatelynotice the split betweenthe threesubcategoriesof thesocial and culturalspecialists,on theone hand, and the
remainingoccupationalsegments,on the other.In line withthe earlier
resultsof Brint,Parkin,and others,it is above all thesocial and cultural
givenpotentialforthe
servicesectorthat turnsout to be a structurally
NSMs.20 The overallmobilizationpotentialofthecraftspecialists,ofthe
20 Thereis a difference
betweentheseresultsandthoseofBrint,becausethesocialand
culturalservicesincludeherethehumanservices,too. As Brint(1985)observeswith
respectto thisgroup,empiricalresultsfortheUnitedStatesare notas clear-cutas
thosefoundhere. In his earlierstudy(Brint1984,pp. 402-3), he foundthatthe
1092
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
New Class
and commercialpersonnel
technicalspecialists,and oftheadministrative
does notdifferfromthatof thepopulationat large. This resultindicates
thatGouldner'sconceptof a new class, made up of "humanisticintellecand unifiedbya cultureofcritical
tuals"and the"technicalintelligentsia"
discourse,does not hold forthe Netherlands.In contrastto the other
occupationalsegmentsin the new middle class, the protectiveservices
even have a clearlybelow-averagepotentialforparticipationin NSMs.
This findingis in line with my expectations.It underscoresthe lack of
coherenceofthepoliticalstanceofthenew middleclass takenas a whole,
segmentof
and it servesas a firstindicationthatthepoliticallydistinctive
thenew class is constituted
by thesocial and culturalspecialists,who are
politicallymore liberal or radical than the othermembersof the new
middleclass.
Turningto thebourgeoisieand theold middleclass, we also findlarge
(see
differences
among the fourcategoriesthat have been distinguished
high
are shownto have a remarkably
n. 7). The traditionalprofessionals
degreeofreadinessto participatein NSMs, one thatis surpassedonlyby
the "othersocial and culturalspecialists."Since theyforma verysmall
groupin absolutetermsin thissample (N = 8), thisresulthas to be interpretedwithcaution.But we shall see in the subsequentanalysesthat
persistsif
thehighdegreeofsupportforNSMs oftraditionalprofessionals
we controlforthe influenceof othervariables.In contrastto traditional
professionals,large employersand farmershardlyforma potentialfor
byan averNSMs at all. The remainingpetitbourgeoisieis characterized
age potentialforNSMs. It is ofsomeinterestthatthemobilizationpotentialforNSMs ofthetraditionalworkingclass is notlowerthanthatofthe
(see n. 5). In theworkingclass,
new workingclass oftheFrenchtheorists
onlytheunskilledworkershave a ratherlow level of supportforNSMs.
Summarizingtheseoverallresults,I do not thinkit possibleto view the
ground
recruiting
new middleclass in generalas theprivilegedstructural
forthe
forNSMs and to dismisstheotherclass locationsas insignificant
mobilizationof thesemovements.
Eliminatingfrommysample the cases withheads of householdswho
have neverbeen employed-a groupof cases forwhichthe operational(see n. 18)izationoftheclass locationremainsrelativelyunsatisfactory
way, as can be seen froma
does notchangetheresultsin any significant
"humanservicesoccupations
werethemostconservative
ofall occupational
categories
on personalmoralityissues,but were comparatively
liberalon welfarestateand
confidence-in-business
issues."Whilesocialworkers
have beenfoundto be politically
liberalin the UnitedStates,teachersin the UnitedStateshave been shownto be
relatively
conservative.
Teachersin theNetherlands
seemto be quitedifferent
from
thosein theUnitedStates.
1093
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AmericanJournalof Sociology
comparisonof thefirsttwo columnsin table 2. On thesegrounds,I have
includedthesecases in the subsequentanalysis.
The last two columnsin table 2 show the averagemobilizationpotential forwage earnersin theprivateand publicsectors.In twoofthethree
occupationalsegmentsof the new middle class, where we findlarger
numbersof wage earnersin both sectors,the employeesin the public
sectorare somewhatmoresupportiveof NSMs thanthosein theprivate
sector.Whilethistendencyis slightamongthecraftspecialists,itappears
to be quite pronouncedamong the administrative
and commercialpersonnel. The largestdifferences
betweenthe two sectorscan be found
amongthe professionaleconomistsand lawyers,who forma small subgroupwithinthe administrative
personnel.They turnout to be rather
hostileto NSMs iftheyworkin theprivatesector(averageindexvalue of
iftheywork
4.9), whiletheyare amongtheirmostenthusiastic
supporters
in thepublicsector(averageindexvalue of 8.1). It is possiblethatmemin general,and economistsand lawyers
bers of public administrations
sectorin particular,choosetheiremployers
for
who workin thenonprofit
much the same reasons as social and culturalspecialistschoose their
specialties.
In general,however,Lamont'sexpectationthat(semi-)professionals
in
thepublicsphereproveto be moreoppositionalthanthosein theprivate
sectordoes nothold. The technicalspecialistsprovidea counterexample.
If one looks morecloselyat thisgroup,one findscomputerspecialiststo
be generallyquite hostileto NSMs (average overall index of 5.2, no
difference
betweensectors),while the technicalspecialistsand natural
scientistshave a much higherpotentialforNSMs if theywork in the
privatesector(averageindexof8.1) thaniftheyworkforthegovernment
come fromtheworking
(averageindexof 5.3).21 Othercounterexamples
class, wherethelower-levelemployeesand theskilledworkerslean somewhat moretowardNSMs when workingin the privatesector.
To assess the net effectsof occupationalsegments,organizationalasand to identify
sets,skills,and sectorof employment
possibleinteraction
an analysisof
effectsamongtheseaspectsof class location,I performed
variance fornew middle-classrespondents.The resultsare reportedin
one for
table 3. Two of the fourmain effectsturnout to be significant,
occupationalsegmentsand the otherfororganizationalassets. Both ef21 This difference
is mostpronounced
amongthetechnicalspecialistsand scientists
without
organizational
assetsand witha highlevelofeducation(averageindexvalues
of9.1 and 4.3, respectively).
Whenonebreaksdowntheoccupational
groupstosucha
level,thenumberof cases involvedis, of course,verysmall,whichmeansthatthe
conclusionsto be drawnfromsuch comparisons
can onlybe verytentative.The
numbersinvolvedhereare N = 8 fortheprivatesectorand N = 4 forthepublic
sector.
1094
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
New Class
TABLE
OVERALL
MOBILIZATION
POTENTIAL
ANOVA
FOR NSMs OF NEW MIDDLE
CLASS:
RESULTS
Source of Variation
Main effects..............................
...........
Occupationalsegment ........
...........
Organizationalassets* ........
...........
Sector(private/public)........
Skills ..................................
Two-wayinteractions:
......
Skillsby organizationalassets ......
......
All othertwo-wayinteractions......
....
All higher-order
interactions..........
NOTE.-N
3
F
df
Sign of F
.001
.001
.001
N.S.
N.S.
8.688
8
4.593
4
7.961
1.661
1.103
1
1
2
3.657
...
...
1
...
.
.06
N. S.
N. S.
= 487.
* Managers and supervisorshave been combinedinto one categorybecause of too few cases in the
categoryof the managers.
and spefectscorroboratethe assumedantagonismbetweentechnocrats
segments
of
occupational
In
differential
effect
addition
to
the
cialists.
less
positionsturnoutto be generally
alreadydiscussed,thosein authority
likelyto supportNSMs than those who do not controlorganizational
assets.Contraryto myexpectations,however,theeffectoforganizational
sectorand skillsdo not
is weak. Employment
assets,althoughsignificant,
netoftheeffectofoccupationalsegment
difference,
make any significant
and hierarchicalposition.In line with the generalargument,thisindicates thatit is not occupationalskillsas such thatare importantforthe
mobilizationin NSMs; it is thetypeofskillsas operationalizedbytheoceffectoftheemcupationalsegmentvariable. Similarly,theinsignificant
ploymentsectorindicatesthat the relevantantagonismarticulatedby
NSMs cuts across the public/private
division. Finally, only one of the
the one forthe twoeffectscomes close to beingsignificant,
interaction
betweenskillsand organizationalassets. The exceptionway interaction
allyhighpotential(9.6) of thosewho have a highdegreeof skills,butno
organizationalassets at theirdisposal, is responsibleforthiseffect.
THE MOBILIZATION POTENTIAL FOR SPECIFIC NEW
SOCIAL MOVEMENTS
all NSMs articulatethe
Accordingto the reasoningin the introduction,
same underlying
values and attitudesand are supposedto be rootedin the
same social-structural
locations.Whetherthisis, indeed,thecase will be
consideredin thissection.In dealingwithspecificmovements,thissec1095
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AmericanJournalof Sociology
tion also triesto show how the potentialforNSMs of different
class
locationsvarieswiththe level of thepotential.Table 4 presentsthemobilizationpotentialofthedifferent
class locationsforthepeace movement
at fourlevels. Three of the fourlevels have been mentionedabove, the
ones of thestrongsympathizers,
of thepotentialparticipants,
and ofthe
participants.22
In theDutch peace movement,one additionallevelcan be
distinguished:
thelevel of supportforthepeople'spetition.In late 1985,
theDutch peace movementhad organizeda petitionagainstthedeploymentofcruisemissilesin theNetherlands,whichwas signedbyabout3.8
millionpeople.
Table 4 confirms
thattheDutch peace movementenjoysan enormous
amountof sympathythroughout
the population.Even amongthefarmers,theclass locationwiththeleast supportforNSMs in generaland for
the peace movementin particular,thereis stilla fourththatfeelsstrong
of the peace mrovesympathyforthis movement.For the sympathizers
ment,the discrepanciesamong class locationsgenerallyreflectthe discrepanciesin the overall mobilizationpotentialfor NSMs quite accurately.As we move to levels involvingmore commitment
to the peace
movement,thesize ofthepotentialdecreasesforall class locations,butin
an unevenway, whichservesto accentuatethediscrepanciesamongclass
and thelevel
locations.A comparisonbetweenthelevel of sympathizers
of participantsshows that the rate of transforming
sympathyfor the
peace movementinto participationin peace movementactivitiesdiffers
fromone class location to the other. Those in class locationswith a
relativelylimitedamountof sympathyforthe movementare especially
unlikelyto act on theirsympathies.Thus, no largeemployer,no protective agent,no computerspecialist,and virtuallyno farmerand no unskilledworkerhave everparticipatedin thepeace movement,whilemore
thanhalfofthoseengagedin othersocial and culturalservices,halfofthe
traditionalprofessionals,
morethana thirdofthemedicalpersonnel,and
morethan a fourthof the teachershave done so. In otherwords,there
seem to be class-specific
barriersto a heavierinvolvementin the peace
movement.The large employers,forexample,have considerablesympathywiththe movement,but even as littleas signingthepeople'spetitionis one step too farformostof them.Skilledand unskilledworkers
withthemovement,on theotherhand,would
who have strongsympathy
a
generallysign petition;theirlimitsof involvementare reached,however, when it comes to more active formsof participation.Social and
Potential
participants
aredefinedas all thosewhosaythattheyarereadyto particiina
onehad alreadyparticipated
pate.The questionusedin thesurveyaskedwhether
thateveryone
who
orwas readyto participate,
assuming
implicitly
specific
movement
at thetimeofthe
in thepast was also readyto participate
had alreadyparticipated
is also madehere.
interview.
Perforce,
thisassumption
22
1096
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Z
|
P
W
~~~~~~~~cn
'IO
N
%O
oC"3
)o o
z !
0
bo
&
cn
0
14
0
z
z
~~ ~~
~ ~
clNt
oe
) ouz00
Os
/
. t-0..
.
-...
. ....
...
m0O
ON
..
... 0l)
... . in...
.
..........
N
.
.
0
.
.
...
......
.
o
S
..
0~~~~~~~~
,w
...'
,
ooo
?4/..
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AmericanJournalof Sociology
notablefortheirlow barriersto active
culturalspecialistsare particularly
23
participation.
In tables5 and 6, thepotentialsforall fiveNSMs are comparedon the
level of potentialparticipants(table 5) and of participants(table 6). In
turning,first,to table 5, we see thaton thelevelofpotentialparticipants,
the ecologymovementcan counton an even broaderpotentialthanthe
peace movementin the Netherlands-43% of the total populationare
readyto participatein theecologymovementas comparedwith37% who
say they would participatein the peace movement.The antinuclear
movement,too, enjoysmuchsupporton thislevel,a thirdofthepopulationbeingreadyto participatein it. The women'smovementwith 14%
potentialparticipants,and, above all, the squatters'movementwith a
mere4% of potentialparticipants,lag farbehind.The squatters'movementlost much of the sympathyit had at the beginningof the 1980s
(Boon 1987).
class locationsforthe
Whenwe comparethepotentialsof thedifferent
fivemovementson thislevel, theoverallrankorderof themovementsis
replicated,apartfromone minorexceptionforeverylocation.Moreover,
in theoverallmobilizationpotentialamongthe
thepatternofdifferences
categoriesis also moreor less replicatedforeach one of the fivemovements.In all instances,it is the social and culturalspecialistsand the
who have thehighestpotential.In all instances,
traditionalprofessionals
and comtoo, craftspecialists,technicalspecialists,and administrative
mercialpersonnelhave comparableaverage mobilizationpotentialsfor
the different
movements.Third, forall the movements,farmers,large
employers,protectiveservicesemployees,and unskilledworkersrank
lowest. It can also be shown that for all the movements,those who
controlorganizationalassets forma somewhatsmallerpotentialthan
thosewho do not. These differences
are, however,quite small, and for
theecologymovementand thewomen'smovementtheytendto be negligible, which is again contraryto the expectationsunderthe new class
hypothesis.
On thelevel ofparticipants(table 6), thepeace movementturnsout to
in thetotal
be theone withthelargestnumberofgrass-roots
participants
population(14% have participatedin activitiesof this movement),followed by theantinuclearmovement(13%). The ecologymovementtakes
onlythirdplace (11%), whilethe women'smovementand the squatters'
23 Strangely
enough,manymorepeoplesaytheyhavesignedthepetition
thanindicate
in themovement,
theyhave participated
and thereare evensomewhatmorepeople
whosaytheyhave signedthepetition
thanpeoplewhoare readyto participate
in the
movement.
Apparently,
signingthe petitionwas notalwaysperceivedas a formof
in a peace movement
participation
at leastnotby a majority
activity,
ofthosewho
signed.
1098
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
e~)
00
0~- 0
0
0
O)
0
Uf
Of)
m
u 0-NmO
C
0)
0.0,
0
>
S Q
H
C4
E~~~~U.
o o in
I
>S
1
_n
_4
t
00C m
_
CN
n
0)
oN '
o
%m
m
"
H
z
t
Q~~~~~~~
?;X
fitX
m
eo
]~.,1 4 1-
0
0
V
04"
(LI0
0)
0)
4
4)
0)
0
;
U)
00
if;
V
0
C
0
'-4
W>
(L
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
I
C,4 -.4
-
C
C
-
in
>
.u)
S
0
, in
o
--
>
CNm
0
0
00N
m
Xeee
-
ni
....
0
-
C- o0
cd
.;3
ON
q
>
E,
o"
..
,
4
4
-4
M
,s,,,
g
X
Y
N o
0~~~~~~~~~
ebo
o
:::::::
Y
.
'
DeXNO
d
l
:::
9
4)
-e
-5
U)
~ ~) ~
1-)
00
1-
,
4
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
New Class
movementagaintrailfarbehind(4% and 2% participants,
respectively).
In
general,theamountofparticipation
in thevariousmovementsreflects
the
level of mobilizationof the respectivesocial movementorganizations.24
Again,theoverallrankorderof themovementsis generallyreplicated
for everyclass category,25
and the patternof differences
amongclass
categoriesis also moreor less replicatedforeach of thefivemovements.
Althoughthefivemovementsconsidereddifferin theabsoluteamountof
supporttheyreceivefromthepopulation,thesimilarity
ofthepatternsof
supportforthedifferent
movementswithregardto class locationis striking. On different
levels of mobilizationpotentialand fordifferent
movements,we findpatternsof supportthatare analogousto the patternfor
theoverallmobilizationpotential.26
This is a strongindicationthatwe are
dealingwithfiveinstancesof the same behavior.
THE RELEVANCE OF THE NEW CLASS FOR THE
MOBILIZATION OF NSMs
If we comparethe class compositionof the outercirclesof the different
movementswiththatof thegeneralpopulation,we notethattheseouter
circlesresemblethe compositionof the Dutch populationquite closely.
Thus, the strongsympathizers
forthe peace movementforman almost
representative
cross sectionof the Dutch population.The same is to a
largeextenttrueof thosewho signedthe petition.Only thefarmers,the
largeemployers,and theprotectiveservicesemployeesare clearlyunderrepresented
amongthesignersofthepetition,and thesocial and cultural
specialiststurnout to be somewhatoverrepresented
among them.The
workingclass does not turn out to be underrepresented
on these less
involvinglevelsofthemobilizationpotentialforthepeace movement.In
combinationwiththegenerallyhighlevelofsympathy
notedabove (table
4), we can concludethatthepeace movementin particularis verybroadly
based in the Dutch population.
24 The largenumber
ofdeclaredparticipants
intheantinuclear
is somewhat
movement
puzzling,however,becausethismovement
has notbeenmobilizing
muchin recent
years.A ratherunattractive
possibleexplanationforthisresultis thata numberof
respondents
mixedup thestruggleof thepeace movement
againstnuclearweapons
withthestruggle
oftheantinuclear
movement
againstnuclearenergy.
25 Thereare,however,
severalexceptions
to thisgeneralpattern-onesignificant
and
severalminorones. The significant
deviationfromthegeneralpatternconcernsthe
potential
ofprotective
servicespersonnel
fortheecologymovement.
Thismovement
is
theonlyone in whichprotection
specialistshave participated.
If thisdoes notseem
unlikely,it is verysurprising
to findthemamongthe threecategoriesthat have
participated
mostin the ecologymovement.Giventhatthe numbersinvolvedare
rathersmall,thisfigurecouldbe subjectto someerror.
26 The sameis trueofthelevelofsympathizers
forwhichno data comparing
all five
movements
are presented
here.
1101
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AmericanJournalof Sociology
As we move closer to the core of the movement,however,the class
compositionof the potentialchanges drastically.Table 7 presentsthe
in thefive
class compositionofthetotalpopulationand oftheparticipants
NSMs. In everycase, thenew middleclass providescloseto a majorityor
a majorityoftheparticipants.In everycase, moreover,it is above all the
social and cultural specialistswho are most heavily overrepresented
amongtheparticipants.In thepeace movement;morethana thirdofthe
participantscome fromthisoccupationalsegment.If we move one step
ofthe
nearerthecoreofthemovementand considertheclass composition
group of activistswho have organizedthe people's petitionin the six
localitiesin the Netherlandswe have studiedin detail, the resultsare
even more striking.The specialistsin the social and culturalservices
make up fullyone-halfof these activists.Amongthe peace movement
In the other
activists,all othergroupsturnout to be underrepresented.
group
movements,
too,thesocial and culturalspecialistsare thestrongest
amongthe participants.
In everycase, withthe exceptionof the squatters'movement,the adpartofthe
ministrative
and commercialpersonnelalso forman important
participants.Because ofitslargesize, thisoccupationalsegmentis imporOthersizable groupsin themovetant,even ifit is notoverrepresented.
mentscome fromthe upper reachesof the workingclass and fromthe
petitbourgeoisie.Fromtheseresults,we can concludethattheNSMs are
supportedby broad partsof the populationbut thattheiractiveparticiroots
pants and theirleaders in particularhave theirsocial-structural
mainlyin the segmentsof the new middle class that are most closely
associatedwiththe new class as conceptualizedhere-the specialistsin
social and culturalservices.
CLASS AND DEMOGRAPHIC/RESIDENTIAL
CHARACTERISTICS
A numberof demographic/residential
are now introduced
characteristics
to testtherelativemeritsofthenew-classhypothesis
and itsalternatives.
urban
These characteristics
includeage, education,religiousaffiliation,
location,unemployment,
studentstatus,and gender.The operationalizationof thesecharacteristics
is straightforward,
withthe possibleexceptionof religiousaffiliation.
In additionto the present-day
religiouscomoftheparentshas also
oftherespondent,
thereligiousaffiliation
mitment
been operationalizedto assess the separate effectof primaryreligious
socialization.27
27 The correlationbetween currentparticipationin churchand primarysocializationin
an unaffiliatedfamilyis particularlyhigh (R = -.41). For the threedenominations,
the correspondingcorrelationsturn out to be much lower: .21 for Catholic parental
families,.14 for orthodoxProtestantfamilies,and .06 forProtestantfamilies.
1102
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Z
,
SE
N?
? NX
00o
'I-
E)
t
?@-
H
oi
-
?
C.
Ot
>to
z
:
cE-4
)
z
Q
neNXNo
?
0
..
0
cn
-
@0v*0
-----
.n
0
*
0*
U
=
@ ON
@ o
.
WA w ' g
.
.* 0
4
4i~~~~~~
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AmericanJournalof Sociology
fortheeffectofall thebackgroundcharacterTo controlsystematically
isticsdiscussed,I performeda numberof regressionanalyses.In these
class
analyses,dummyvariableswereused as indicatorsforthedifferent
locations.The locationwiththelowestpotentialforNSMs, thefarmers,
regression
coefficients
was assignedas base category.The corresponding
class locations
will, therefore,
indicateto what extentpeople in different
are morelikelyto mobilizein NSMs thanare farmers.In additionto these
dummies,an ordinalindicatorfororganizationalassets, the onlyother
significant
aspect of class locationin the presentcontext,is introduced.
Dummyvariableshave also been used to indicategender,studentstatus,
of parents.For thelast charunemployment,
and thereligiousaffiliation
with each of the three
acteristic,a dummyis introducedforaffiliation
and traditionalProtesmajorDutch churches-the Catholic,Protestant,
The remaininggroupof miscellaneous
tant-and forthe nonaffiliated.
formsthe base category.Ordinalvariableswereused to indiaffiliations
cate education,degreeof urbanizationof the place whereone lives, and
analysis
churchattendance.Table 8 presentstheresultsoftheregression
fortheoverallmobilizationpotentialforNSMs. It givesthestandardized
and adjustedR2s.
regressioncoefficients
Regression(1) in table 8 representsan attemptto predictthe overall
mobilizationpotentialforNSMs on the basis of class structurealone,
usingthetwo indicatorsof class locationthatturnedout to be significant
in table 3-organizational assets and occupationalsegments.As is indicated bytheR2, onlya smallpartofthevarianceoftheoverallmobilizationpotentialcan be explainedin thisway. Nevertheless,the patternof
thecoefficients
organizationalassetsare once again shown
is instructive:
effecton supportfor
to have only a small, negative,albeit significant,
NSMs. The hierarchicalpositionseems to be of less importancethan
and "spewhichopposes"technocrats"
suggestedbythemainhypothesis,
cialists." The relevanceofthisdistinction
is, however,again broughtout
ifwe turnto the effectsof the different
occupationalsegments:indepenall theclass locations
dentof one's positionin organizationalhierarchies,
exceptthoseoflargeemployersand protectiveservicesare shownto have
a significantly
higherpotentialthan the farmers.However,the effectof
one.
thesocial and culturalspecialistsis shownto be by farthestrongest
Also in line withthe resultspresentedearlierare the relativelylargenet
effectfortheadministrative
and commercialpersonneland therelatively
and commercial
small net effectfortechnicalspecialists.Administrative
personnelon the lower hierarchicallevels apparentlyhave a relatively
large potentialforNSMs.
In regression(2), educationis added to theset ofindependentdeterminants.The liberalizingeffectofeducationis, indeed,substantiated.Educationhas a verysignificant
effecton thepotentialforNSMs, netofclass
1104
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
New Class
TABLE 8
OVERALL
MOBILIZATION
POTENTIAL
STANDARDIZED
BY SOCIAL-STRUCTURAL
REGRESSION
1
IndependentVariables
1. Organizational asset ............-
2. Large employers..
3. Petit bourgeoisie
.
3. Traditionalprofessionals.
5. Protectiveservices .
6. Craft specialists
.
.
03
2
- .08*
.02
.
. 10***
..04
..16***
.
11. Skilledworkers .
..15***
12. Unskilledworkers..............
13. Education
.
...22***
14. Age
15. Gender
Urban location .................
No religiousparents.
Catholicparents ...............
Protestantparents
22. TraditionalProtestantparents
23. Churchattendance
R2adjusted .....................
- .05
.01
4
- .07*
.03
.12***
.10
.07*
.07**
.06*
.02
.16***
.00
.12***
.05
.11**
.26***
.14**
.15***
.00
.10
.06
.21***
37***
.18***
.15***
.28***
.18***
.19***
.09*
.14***
.04
.11
.25***
.11**
.13
.11**
.09*
.12***
-.
16. Student
17. Unemployment
18.
19.
20.
21.
3
.13***
..15***
7. Technical specialists.
. .11*
8. Administrative/commercial
9. Social-cultural..
10. Lower-level employees .
.09*
CHARACTERISTICS:
COEFFICIENTS
19***
.00
.01
.02
- .02
.
.11
12*
.02
- .02
. 12***
.08
i***
-.
.15
.07
.14
.12*
01
.04
- . 19*
.20
= 1,158.
NOTE.-N
*P
.05.
**P=
.01.
*** P = .001.
location.It is interesting
to notethe effectthe additionof educationhas
on theeffectsofthedifferent
class locations:whiletheadditionofeducationattenuatestheeffects
oflocationsin thenew middleclass,itenhances
theeffectsof thosein the workingclass. On the one hand, thisis to say
thatsome of the overallpotentialforNSMs in thenew middleclass can
be attributedto the generalliberalizingeffectof educationalone. In the
case of the technicalspecialists,thisis in factthe onlyreasonwhytheir
potentialis somewhatlargerthanthatofthefarmers.On theotherhand,
thisalso meansthattheworkingclass has a relativelylargepotentialfor
NSMs ifwe takeitsratherlow educationallevelintoaccount.This rather
unexpectedresultmay be explainedby the traditionof dissentthathas
characterizedthe Dutch workingclass and by the close ties that exist
betweentheorganizationsofthelabormovement-unionsand partieson
1105
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AmericanJournalof Sociology
the Left-and the NSMs (see Kriesi and van Praag, Jr., 1987). Traditionalworkingclass tiesapparentlystillservea mobilizingfunction,
even
forNSMs.
In regression(3), all the otherbackgroundcharacteristics,
with the
exceptionof religiousaffiliation,
are added. This regressiondocuments
thestrongeffectofage. The youngerone is, thelargerone's mobilization
potentialforNSMs. The effectof urban locationalso turnsout to be
highlysignificant,
as expected.The expectationsconcerningthe unemployedand the studentswere not, however,met: the studentsand the
unemployedare not significantly
morelikelyto supportNSMs than the
restof the population.This is an indicationthatAlber'shypothesis
of a
radicalizingacademic proletariatformingthe main recruiting
groundof
NSMs may be somewhatoffthe mark, at least for the Netherlands.
less likelyto support
Women,in turn,are not shownto be significantly
NSMs, whichprovidessupportfortheidea thatthebarriersto women's
in NSMs are significantly
participation
lowerthanin traditionalpolitics.
Introducingthese additionalcharacteristics
considerablyattenuatesthe
effectof education-youngerpeople and people livingin urbanlocations
are notonlymorelikelyto participatein NSMs but generallyalso better
educated28-and also decreasesthe effectsof class locationsto some extent,without,however,changingthe overallpattern.
In regression(4), religiousaffiliation
is added. Churchattendanceis
shown to have the expectedstrongnegativeeffecton the potentialfor
NSMs: themoreone is integrated
intochurchlife,theless one is readyto
participatein NSMs. This effectis strongerthan thatof one's religious
in some
socializationduringchildhood.Still, the latteris nonnegligible
cases: people fromreligiouslyunaffiliated
familiesor of Catholicorigin
seemto be somewhatmorereadyto participatein thesemovementsthan
thosefromotherreligiousdenominations.Addingtheseindicatorsraises
theadjustedR2 to 20%, whichmeansthatthejointexplanatory
powerof
theadditionalsocial-structural
characteristics
is largerthanthatofclass.
does not,however,changethegeneralpatAddingreligiousaffiliation
ternof determinants
the indicatorforsocial and
either.Most important,
cultural specialistsremains the strongestdeterminantof supportfor
A number
NSMs even ifwe add all theotherbackgroundcharacteristics.
ofotherclass locationsalso retaintheirsignificance.
The workingclass in
in
the
are
still
shownto have a
skilledworkers particular,
general,and
thetradirelativelylargepotentialforNSMs. Amongtheself-employed,
tional professionalsand, quite unexpectedly,the petitbourgeoisiegive
moresupportto thesemovementsthanfarmers.In thenew
significantly
middleclass, on theotherhand, nextto social and culturalspecialistsitis
28
The correlation
betweeneducationand age is R = -.38.
1106
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
New Class
onlytheadministrative
and commercialpersonnelwhose supportdiffers
significantly
fromthatof thefarmersifall theotherbackgroundcharacteristicsare controlled.Finally,adding religiousaffiliation
considerably
attenuatesthe effectof age. The youngergenerationsare less tied to
traditionalreligiouscultureand have, therefore,
a lower potentialfor
NSMs.29 The directeffectof age, net of affiliation
withone of the religious denominations,
is stillhighlysignificant
but muchmorerestricted
than appeared at firstsight.
Similarregressions
have been performed
forthemobilizationpotential
of each of the five NSMs. The structureof determinants
forthe five
specificmovementscloselyresemblestheone described.Table 9 presents
theresultsforthepeace movement.For thismovement,thepercentageof
varianceexplained,too,is comparableto theone fortheoverallpotential.
For the othermovements,the percentageof variance explainedranges
from17% fortheecologymovementto 5% forthesquatters'movement.
For the peace movement,but also forthe ecologymovementand the
antinuclearmovement,the indicatorforsocial and culturalspecialists
remainsthe strongestdeterminant.For the women'smovement,gender
and educationare stronger;forthesquatters'movement,urbanlocation,
education,and churchattendanceare the only determinants
of some
significance.
The regressionanalysisperformed
so farimpliesa cumulativepattern
of causation. The question still to be answered is whetherclass and
in particularclass and age, indemographic/residential
characteristics,
teractin determining
the potentialforNSMs. An analysisof variance
revealsthatthisis, indeed,thecase. As expected,boththeeffects
of age
and of class turnout to be highlysignificant,
and therealso is an interactioneffect,
at the.01 level.30For an analysisofthisinteraction
significant
effectin moredetail,it is not advisable to introducean interaction
term
intothe previousregressionequationsbecause of multicollinearity
problems and problemsof interpretation.3'
A different,
morepromisingap29 The correlation
is .24. Forthedifferent
parental
betweenage andchurchattendance
withage are:forCatholics,-.03; fortheorthodox
churchaffiliations,
thecorrelations
.21, whichindicatethatit is amongthe
Protestants,
-.07; and fortheProtestants,
farchurchculturehas been particularly
Protestants
thattheerosionof traditional
reaching.
30 The F-valueofthemaineffect
ofage is 86.908,1 df,P = .001; theF-valueofthe
is
effect
maineffect
ofclass is 7.096, 11 df,P = .001; theF-valueoftheinteraction
2.232, 11 df,P = .011.
termscorrelate
highlywiththeoriginalvariables,which
Multiplicative
interaction
cocauses large standarderrorsof the estimates.If one workswithstandardized
termshasthedisadvantage
that
efficients,
as I do inthisanalysis,theuseofinteraction
andinteraction
can nolongerbe determined
therelativeimportance
ofthemaineffects
(Allison1977).
31
1107
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AmericanJournalof Sociology
TABLE 9
PEACE MOVEMENT
MOBILIZATION
CHARACTERISTICS:
POTENTIAL
STANDARDIZED
Independent
Variables
1. Organizational asset..
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
Large employers .
0
4
Petitbourgeoisie ...............
Traditionalprofessionals.
Protectiveservices.
0
2
Craftspecialists ..
Technicalspecialists...........
Administrative/commercial
......
Social-cultural.................
Lower-levelemployees.
Skilledworkers .
0
9
*
Unskilledworkers...............
Education .....................
14. Age
15. Gender
16. Student
BY SOCIAL-STRUCTURAL
REGRESSION
1
2
.09**
.04
.12***
.13***
.02
- .08*
.02
0***
.10*
.00
08*
. .08**
. 18**
.08*
.04
.34***
.10**
.09*
.
3
- .05
.02
.09***
.11***
- .02
4
- .07*
.03
.09***
.10l
- .02
.13**
.25***
.04
.03
.10*
.04
.03
.10*
.25***
.11*
.13**
05
.22***
.25***
.08
.10*
.03
.10**
- .21***
.01
.05
17. Unemployment
-.05
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
Urban location
No religiousparents
Catholicparents
Protestantparents
TraditionalProtestantparents
23. Churchattendance
R2 adjusted .....................
COEFFICIENTS
.06*
.07
.09*
.02
.09
- 16
.02
.05
-.05
.03
.07
.00
-.05
.03
-.11*
.09
.12
.16
.18
= 1,158.
NOTE.-N
*P
.05.
**P
.01.
*** P = .001.
proachto analyzingtheinteraction
betweenage and class is to runseparate regressionsforthe youngercohortsborn afterthe war and forthe
oldercohorts.Table 10 presentstheresultsof two cohort-specific
regressions correspondingto the firstand the last columnsin the previous
tables.
These resultsclarifya numberof points.Firstof all, it becomesquite
clear thatclass explainsvirtuallynothingabout thepoliticalpotentialof
the older cohorts,while its explanatorypower is nonnegligiblein the
youngerage group. Second, in the youngercohorts,the patternof the
different
class effectsobtainedcloselyparallelsthegeneralpatternfound
in table 8, but the effectsare stronger.This impliesthat the general
patterndisplayedin theprevioustablesis essentially
a resultoftheassoci1108
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
New Class
TABLE 10
OVERALL MOBILIZATION POTENTIAL BY SOCIAL CHARACTERISTICS AND COHORT:
STANDARDIZED REGRESSION COEFFICIENTS
COHORTS
INDEPENDENTVARIABLES
-40
1. Organizational asset ......
......
2. Large employers ........
.......
3. Petit bourgeoisie ...............
3. Traditional professionals .......
5. Protective services ......
.......
6. Craft specialists .......
........
7. Technical specialists ......
......
8. Administrative/commercial
......
9. Social-cultural .................
10. Lower-level employees .....
.....
11. Skilled workers .......
.........
12. Unskilled workers ......
.......
13. Education
14. Age
15. Gender
16. Student
17. Unemployment
18. Urban location
19. No religious parents
20. Catholic parents
.
21. Protestant parents .............
22. Traditional Protestant parents ...
23.
Church
attendance
-.19***
R2 adjusted .....................
N .............................
-.08
.04
.22***
. 13**
.02
.13*
.13*
.26***
.48***
.20**
.17*
.10
40+
.03
-.01
.06
.08
.04
.16***
.07
.12
.19***
.18**
.16**
.12
.....
.12
570
.02
588
COHORTS
-40
-.10*
.03
.17***
.08**
.00
.11
.07
.17**
.35***
.17**
.20**
.12
.22***
.04
.07
.02
.03
.07*
.24**
20**
.06
.10
19
.22
570
40+
.00
.02
.04
.04
.04
.14**
.03
.08
.17**
.13*
.13*
.12*
.02
-.05
-.03
-.08
.04
.08
.05
-.08
.00
- .
17***
.07
588
*P
.05.
**P=
.01.
*** P = .001.
ationsthatobtainin theyoungercohorts.In particular,theeffectof the
social and culturalspecialistsis verystrongforthe youngercohorts.In
theoldercohorts,too, social and culturalspecialistshave an above average potentialforNSMs, buttheirsupportremainsmuchmorelimited.In
additionto thesocial and culturalspecialistsand craftspecialists,onlythe
working-class
locationshave a significant
effecton supportforNSMs in
theoldercohorts,whichsubstantiates
theradicalizingeffect
oftraditional
working-class
culture.
Third, the introduction
of the demographic/residential
characteristics
attenuatesthe class effectssomewhat, but they remain by far the
1109
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AmericanJournalof Sociology
strongest
for-theyoungergenerations.For theoldergenerations,
church
attendanceseems to be the strongestdeterminant
of supportforNSMs,
but the overall explanatorypower of social-structural
characteristics
turnsout to be ratherlimited.Fourth,theseresultsalso revealan interaction betweenage and educationfor the supportof the movementsin
question:theliberalizingeffectofeducationcan be confirmed
onlyforthe
youngercohorts.For thesecohorts,it is, however,highlysignificant.32
Fifth,churchattendancehas a strongnegativeeffectin bothage groups.
The youngercohortsmay be generallyless integratedinto traditional
religiousculture,but thoseamongthemwho stillare, turnout to be as
littlelikelyto supportNSMs as churchmembersin the older cohorts.
There is, however,also an interactionwithregardto the effectsof primaryreligioussocialization.These effectscan be establishedonlyforthe
youngergenerations,which enhances the notionof a profoundvalue
changeafterthe war.33This notionis also corroborated
by thefactthat
of
in thetwo setsofcohorts.The effect
age is no longerofanysignificance
age on thesupportofNSMs is, in otherwords,essentially
capturedbythe
distinction
betweenprewarand postwarcohorts.
DISCUSSION
This analysisof the mobilizationpotentialof Dutch NSMs has shown
thatthe idea of the rise of an oppositionalnew middleclass is bothtoo
narrowand too broad. It turnsoutto be toonarrowbecausedissentin the
to theeducatednew
senseof readinessto supportNSMs is notrestricted
middleclass. The resultsof the presentanalysishave shownthatin the
Netherlandsthe NSMs are supportedby broad segmentsof the Dutch
population.The compositionof theoutercirclesofthepeace movement,
thebroadestofall NSMs in theNetherlands,was shownto comecloseto
These resultsare in line withLadd's (Ladd and Lipset 1975, pp. 2 12-31; Ladd 1978,
1979) extensiveanalyses of American polling data from1936 throughthe mid-1970s,
which "showed that college graduates (and those with higherlevel degrees) reversed
theirprevious conservativepreferencesin the 1960s and 1970s to become one of the
most liberal strata on issues involving governmentactivism, spending on social programs, regulationof business, extendingopportunitiesto minoritiesand women, and
relaxationof restrictionson sexual morality"(Brint 1985, p. 391).
33 More specifically,
it is shown thatpeople withnonaffiliated
or Catholic parentshave
a higherpotentialforNSMs. In n. 29, I note thatthe processof disaffiliation
has above
all affectedthe Protestants.In combination,these two resultssuggestthat the process
of depillarization has had differenteffectson Protestantsand Catholics. While the
Protestantchurch has weakened in the process of liberalization,the Catholic church
has gone throughthe same process of liberalizationwithout,however, weakening to
the same extent.The orthodoxProtestants,finally,seem to have been least affectedby
the structuraland cultural change.
32
1110
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
New Class
beinga representative
crosssectionof theDutch population.In particular, the workingclass turnedout to have an unexpectedly
highlevel of
supportforthese movementsif the relativelylow level of educationof
workerswas takenintoaccount.Also unexpectedwas therelativelyhigh
degreeof supportof NSMs amongthepetitbourgeoisie(excludingfarmers). In theclass locationsoutsidethenew middleclass, thelargestmeasure of supportwas foundamongtraditionalprofessionals-thetypeof
knowledgetheycontrolseemsto be moreimportant
to theirpoliticsthan
thefactthattheyare self-employed.
The conceptof an oppositionalnew middleclass, on theotherhand,is
too broad, because onlypart of the new middleclass seems to support
oppositionaltendenciessuchas thosearticulatedbytheNSMs. Thereis a
splitin thenew middleclass thatis reflected
in thesupportfortheNSMs.
More specifically,
thereis a splitin the youngergenerationsof thisnew
middleclass. This split,whichwas foundby Brintand Parkinas well,
separatesthesocial and culturalspecialistsfromthetechnocrats
made up
of the managers(i.e., thosecontrolling
organizationalassetsin general),
of the technicalspecialists,of the craftspecialists,and of the protective
services.While theyoungsocial and culturalspecialistsformthe avantgarde of the NSMs, the technocratssupportthesemovementsonlyto a
limitedextent,which is, moreover,entirelyattributableto background
characteristics
otherthan theirpositionsin the productionprocess. In
contrastto myexpectations,themanagersare generallynotshownto be
hostileto NSMs. But theyare notamongtheirmoreenthusiastic
supporterseither.Also in contrastto whatI had expected,theadministrative
and
commercialpersonnelas a wholeare to be placed somewherein between
thetwo camps. The detailedresultsforthisoccupationalsegment,howin
ever,fitthegeneralidea of a splitbetweenspecialistsand technocrats
the new middleclass quite well: the administrative
and commercialpersonnelare themselvessplitinternally.Certainpartsof thisoccupational
segmenttendto belongto the camp of the social and culturalspecialists
(theyoungerpublicemployeesin general,and theprofessional
economists
and lawyersin public servicesin particular),whileothers(theolderemployees,and economistsand lawyersin privateprofit-oriented
organizations)tendto belongto the camp of the technocrats.
Taken together,these resultscorroboratethe proposedconceptof a
new class ofspecialistsopposingtechnocrats
who encroachon theirrelativeautonomy,and theysuggestthattheconfrontation
betweenthesetwo
camps is takingplace withinthe contextof the mobilizationof NSMs.
The struggleof theseNSMs forindividualautonomyand againstnew,
invisibleriskscan, in part at least, be interpreted
as the struggleof the
new class against the technocratsexecutingsystemicimperatives(the
lll
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AmericanJournalof Sociology
"ironcage" of Max Weber)and againstthe unintendedconsequencesof
theirauthoritative
decisions.34
The analysishas also shownthatthenew class is nottheonlydeterminantofthemobilizationin NSMs. Educationexertsa liberalizing
effect
in
theyoungergenerations
thatcutsacrossthesplitbetweentechnocrats
and
specialists.I also foundindicationsthattheprofoundvalue changesthat
have taken place in the postwarperiod contributeto the mobilization
potentialof NSMs irrespectiveof class. To what extentthese value
changesare relatedto thedistinction
betweentechnocrats
and specialists
could notbe analyzedherebecause I did nothave independentmeasures
forindividualvalue patternsat my disposal. The detailedstudyof the
interrelationship
betweenindividualvalue patternsand thevariousclass
locationsdistinguished
hereseemsto be a promising
lineoffurther
analysis. Finally,theresultspresentedare notincompatible
withan interpretation emphasizingthe dissolutionof traditionalties and an increasein
individualautonomy.Althoughit mayseem so at firstsight,an increase
in individualization
and theformation
ofa new class maynotbe mutually
exclusivedevelopments.Even if the membersof this new class put a
heavyemphasison individualautonomy,and even iftheyhave endedup
as membersof thisclass primarilyas a resultof self-selection,
thisdoes
not mean that theycould opt out of it at any moment.Given the high
ofthejob
degreeofspecializationoftheirskills,and giventheconstraints
market,theymay discoverthat theyform"a groupof people who by
virtueofwhattheypossessare compelledto engagein thesame activities
iftheywant to make the best use of theirendowments."35
as a
The mobilizationof NSMs has predominantly
been interpreted
culturalphenomenonor as theresultofa unique politicalconjuncture.36
With the passing of that unique historicalmoment,it is suggested,the
NSMs willlose theirmobilizationcapacityand eventuallydisappear.The
weakeningof all, and the virtualdisappearanceof some of,thesemovementsin the courseof the 1980s is takenas proofof thisinterpretation.
Nevertheless,thedata presentedhereshow,at leastfortheNetherlands,
3 In discussing
the issues articulatedby the studentmovement-inmy view the
movement
fromwhichall theNSMs originated,
Mann (1973,p. 56) nioted
yearsago
thatthe"socialcontradiction"
involvedseemed"to be lessbetweenthetechnology
of
knowledge
and privateproperty
thanbetweenthetechnocratic
and culturalfunctions
ofeducation."
35 This is Elster's(1985,p. 331) definition
ofclass.
36 The workof theauthorscitedin thecourseof thispaperformexceptions
to this
generalobservation.Anotherimportantexceptionis Boudon (1971, 1976), who
stressedtheradicalizing
consequences
ofimbalancesbetweentheeducationalsystem
and theoccupationalsystem.He presented
data (1971)thatindicatethatas earlyas
May 1968such imbalancesplayedan important
rolein themobilization
of French
students.
1112
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
New Class
thatthe mobilizationpotentialof thesemovementshad notdisappeared
by the mid-1980sand that this potentialhas a structurally
determined
core. There are a numberof indicationsthatthe structuralsituationof
this core has undergoneconsiderablechange over the past few years
undertheinfluenceof theeconomiccrisisand thesqueeze of thewelfare
state. The squeeze of the welfarestate is of particularrelevancehere
because it impliesan increasein hierarchicalcontroland an increasein
the controlaccorded to marketforces,which spell a reductionin the
autonomyof the individualprofessionalemployedby the state and a
reductionin thesphereofinfluenceofthestatein general.37
The situation
of these "servantsof the state" is furtherworsenedby the widespread
recognition
on thepoliticalLeftthatthestatewas notable to do what it
had promisedto do or whatone had expecteditto be able to do (Wijmans
1987, p. 268). The question is of what kind of effectthese structural
changeshave on thereadinessoftheprofessional
employeesin thecoreof
the mobilizationpotentialto supportfuturechallengesof NSMs.
In contrastto what is suggestedby Brint,it may be assumedthatthe
increasedthreatsto theindividualautonomyin thelarge-scaleorganizationsofthestate,and thedisillusionment
about thepossibilities
ofacting
withinand throughthe state,may cause new cohortsof social and culturalspecialistsand new cohortsof administrative
specialistsemployed
by the state to be particularlystrongsupportersof the goals of NSMs
forindividualautonomyand againstthe risksof technocratic
struggling
decisionmaking.And thestruggleofsuch NSMs mightpossiblycontribute to the formationof what has been here conceptualizedas the new
class.
REFERENCES
Alber,Jens.1985."Modernisierung,
neueSpannungslinien
unddie politischen
Chancen derGrunen."PolitischeVierteljahresschrift
26:211-26.
in MultipleRegression."
Allison,Paul D. 1977. "TestingforInteraction
American
JournalofSociology83:144-54.
in
Barnes,Samuel,Max Kaase, etal., eds. 1979.PoliticalAction:Mass Participation
Five Western
Democracies.London:Sage.
Beck,Ulrich.1983."Jenseits
von StandundKlasse?"Pp. 35-74 in Soziale Ungleichheiten,editedby R. Kreckel.Soziale Welt,Sonderband2. Gottingen.
AufdemWegin eine andereModerne.Frankfurt:
. 1986.Risikogesellschaft:
Suhrkamp.
3 Parkin (1979, p. 106) opposes the "squeeze of the welfarestate" to an alleged "loss of
autonomy" of the (semi-) professionals. I do not see how he can maintain that a
"squeeze of the welfarestate"does not implya "loss of autonomy"ofthoseemployedin
(semi-) professionalpositionsof the welfarestate. Think, e.g., of the consequences of
the increased threatof being dismissed.
1113
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AmericanJournalof Sociology
Bell, Daniel. 1979. "The New Class: A Muddled Concept." Pp. 169-90 in The New
Class? edited by B. Bruce-Briggs. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction.
Boon, Arie den. 1987. Perceptie van anderen. Ph.D. dissertation.Universityof Amsterdam.
Boudon, Raymond. 1971. "Sources of Student Protest in France." Annals of the
AAPSS 395:139-49.
. 1976.Education,Opportunity
and Social Inequality:Changing
Prospectsin
WesternSociety. New York: Wiley.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1982. Die feinen Unterschiede.Frankfurt:Suhrkamp.
Brand, Karl-Werner,
ed. 1985. Neue soziale Bewegungen
in Westeuropa
und den
USA: Ein internationaler
Vergleich.
Frankfurt:
Campus.
. 1987. "KontinuitAit
und DiskontinuitAit
in den neuen sozialen Bewegungen."
Pp. 30-44 in Neue sozialeBewegungen
in derBundesrepublik
Deutschland,
edited
by Roland Roth and Dieter Rucht. Frankfurt:Campus.
Brint,Steven. 1984. " 'New Class' and Cumulative Trend Explanations of the Liberal
Political Attitudesof Professionals."AmericanJournal of Sociology 90:30-71.
. 1985. "The Political Attitudesof Professionals."Annual Review of Sociology
11:389-414.
Burklin, Wilhelm. 1982. "Die Griinen und die 'Neue Politik.' " Politische Vierteljahresschrift22:360-75.
. 1984. Grune Politik. Opladen: Westdeutscher.
Byrne, Paul. 1986. "The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament: The Growth of a
ProtestGroup." Paper presentedto the workshopon political protest,ECPR Joint
Sessions, Gotheburg.
Collins,Randall.1979.TheCredential
Society:AnHistoricalSociologyofEducation
and Stratification.New York: Academic.
Cotgrove, Stephen, and Andrew Duff. 1980. "Environmentalism,Middle Class Radicalism and Politics." Sociological Review 28:333-5 1.
. 1981. "Environmentalism,Values and Social Change." British Journal of
Sociology 32:92-110.
Diani, Mario, and Giovanni Lodi. 1988. "Three Faces of Environmentalism."In
FromStructure
to Action:Social Movement
acrossCultures,edited
Participation
by Bert Klandermans, Hanspeter Kriesi, and Sidney Tarrow. Greenwich,Conn.:
JAI (in press).
Elster, Jon. 1985. Making Sense ofMarx. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.
Fietkau, Hans-Joachim, et al. 1982. Umwelt im Spiegel der offentlichen
Meinung.
Frankfurt:Campus.
Freidson,Eliot. 1986.TheProfessional
Powers:A StudyoftheInstitutionalization
of
Formal Knowledge. Chicago: Universityof Chicago Press.
Funk, Albrecht, Heinz Gerhard Haupt, Wolf-DieterNarr, and Falco Werkentin.
1984. Verrechtlichung
und Verdrangung:
Die Biurokratie
und ihreKlientel.Opla-
den: Westdeutscher.
Alvin.1979.TheFutureofIntellectuals
and theRise oftheNewClass. New
Gouldner,
York: Seabury.
Ingelhart, R. 1971. "The Silent Revolution in Europe: IntergenerationalChange in
Post-IndustrialSocieties." American Political Science Review 65:991-1017.
. 1977. The SilentRevolution:ChangingValuesand PoliticalStylesamong
WesternPublics. Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress.
. 1981. "Post-Materialismin an Environmentof Insecurity."American Polit-
ical ScienceReview.75:880-900.
Klandermans, Bert. 1986. "New Social Movements and Resource Mobilization: The
European and the American Approach." InternationalJournal of Mass Emergen-
cies and Disasters4:13-37.
1114
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
New Class
Klandermans, Bert, and Sidney Tarrow. 1988. Introduction.In From Structureto
Action:Social MovementParticipationacrossCultures,editedby BertKlandermans, Hanspeter Kriesi, and Sidney Tarrow. Greenwich, Conn.: JAI (in press).
Kriesi,Hanspeter,ed. 1985. Bewegungin der SchweizerPolitik: Fallstudienzu
Campus.
in derSchweiz.Frankfurt:
Mobilisierungsprozessen
politischen
. 1988. "Local Mobilization forthe People's Petitionof the Dutch Peace Move-
acrossCulParticipation
ment."In FromStructureto Action:Social Movement
tures,edited by Bert Klandermans, Hanspeter Kriesi, and Sidney Tarrow. Greenwich, Conn.: JAI (in press).
Kriesi, Hanspeter, and Philip van Praag, Jr. 1987. "Old and New Politics:The Dutch
Peace Movement and the Traditional Political Organizations." European Journal
forPoliticalScience 15:319-46.
Ladd, E. C., Jr. 1979. "Pursuing the New Class: Social Theory and Survey Data."
Pp. 101-22 in The New Class? edited by B. Bruce-Briggs. New Brunswick, N.J.:
Transaction.
. 1978. "The New Lines Are Drawn." Public Opinion 1:14-20.
Ladd, E. C., and S. M. Lipset. 1975. The Divided Academy. New York: Norton.
Lamont, Michele. 1987. "Cultural Capital and the Liberal Political Attitudesof Professionals:Comment on Brint." AmericanJournal of Sociology 92:1501-5.
Feminism
and
Joni.1986.WomenandEuropeanPolitics:Contemporary
Lovenduski,
Public Policy. Brighton:Harvester.
McAdam, John. 1987. "Testing the Theory of the New Class." Sociological Quarterly
28:23-49.
Mallet, Serge. 1963. La nouvelle classe ouvriere. Paris: Ed. du Seuil.
Class.
Working
and ActionamongtheWestern
Mann,Michael.1973.Consciousness
London: Macmillan.
. 1986. "A Crisis in StratificationTheory?" Pp. 40-56 in Gender and
Stratification,edited by R. Crompton and M. Mann. Cambridge: Polity.
Melucci, Alberto. 1984. "An End to Social Movements?" Social Science Information
24:819-35.
Milbrath, Lester W. 1981. "Political Participation."Pp. 197-240 in The Handbook of
Political Behavior, vol. 4. Edited by S. L. Long. New York: Plenum.
Muller-Rommel,Ferdinand. 1982. " 'Parteien neuen Typs' in Westeuropa: Eine vergleichendeAnalyse." ZeitschriftfiirParlamentsfragen13:369-90.
. 1984. "Zum Verhaltnisvon neuen sozialen Bewegungen und neuen Konfliktdimensionenin den politischenSystemenWesteuropas: Eine empirischeAnalyse."
24:441-54.
Journal
furSozialforschung
. 1985. "New Social Movements and Smaller Parties: A Comparative Perspec-
tive." WestEuropeanPolitics8:41-54.
Offe, Claus. 1985. "New Social Movements: Challenging the Boundaries of Institutional Politics." Social Research 52:817-68.
Parkin, Frank. 1968. Middle Class Radicalism. Manchester: Manchester University
Press.
. 1979.Marxismand Class Theory:A BourgeoisCritique.London:Tavistock.
Reuband, Karl-Heinz. 1985. "Politisches Selbstverstandnisund Wertorientierungen
von Anhaingernund Gegnern der Friedensbewegung." Zeitschriftfur Parla-
25-45.
mentsfragen
Sasaki, Masamichi, and Tatsuzo Suzuki. 1987. "Changes in Religious Commitmentin
the United States, Holland, and Japan." AmericanJournal of Sociology 92:105576.
Scholten,Ilja. 1980. "Does ConsociationalismExist? A Critique of the Dutch Experience." Pp. 329-54 in Electoral Participation, edited by Richard Rose. London:
Sage.
1115
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AmericanJournalof Sociology
. 1986. "Introduction:Corporatistand Consociational Arrangements."Pp. 138 in PoliticalStabilityand Neo-Corporatism.
London:Sage.
Schumpeter, Joseph A. (1942) 1962. Capitalism,Socialismand Democracy.New
York: Harper.
Starr,Paul. 1982. The Social Transformation
ofAmericanMedicine. New York:
Basic.
Touraine, Alain. 1971. The Post-Industrial Society. New York: Random House.
Visser,Jelle. 1986. "Die Mitgliederentwicklung
der westeurpaischenGewerkschaften:
26:3-34.
Trends und Konunkturen,1920-1983." Journalffur
Sozialforschung
Midden.
Wijmans,Lucas L. 1987. Beeld en Betekenisvan het Maatschappelijke
Amsterdam:Van Gennep.
Wright,Erik 0. 1985. Classes. London: Verso.
Zald, Mayer N. 1987. "The Future of Social Movements." Pp. 319-36 in Social
Movements in an Organizational Society, edited by Mayer N. Zald and John D.
McCarthy. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction.
1116
This content downloaded from 130.37.129.78 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 12:44:07 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions