Macadam's Structural Explanation of High-Risk Participation in Social Movements and Fantasia's Theory - Essay Example

Due to Macadam's structural explanation of high-risk participation in social movements with Fantasia's theory of "cultures of solidarity" Class consciousness is one aspect that lacks within the American workers setting as a factor cutting across. As a result, activists have been demoralized while the social worker within the same community is baffled. Scientific literature has been generated on American exceptionalism fantasia makes these explanations by demonstrating the complexity of the American work structure from the point that it is a multi faceted and dynamic composition of the working class awareness and taking actions collectively.

McAdams gives it an approach from a view of high-risk activism in an attempt to have social movements and mobilization of the resource. Adams makes his argument that simple affiliations of some organizations are the point of focus in the mobilization of resources on social movements dung McAdams makes his structural analysis including the cognitive factors supported by political opportunities there is part of the mass who gains interest in participation, in the social movements influenced by their environment (McAdams 70).

The extent of participation of these individuals is usually shot-lived. McAdams views activists to possess some traits which drive them to take part in mass movement activities and appeal to others to take part. The ideologies picked usually conform to the interest of the people and influence their attitudes. There are groups whose membership comes along with numerous disadvantages, but the important factor is the attitude of a participant as an individual. About high-risk activism, McAdams makes it clear that the act of activism has a long range of effects with those who come in as recruits at higher risks of taking part in more involved activities.

The behavioral role has higher impacts as a norm encourages the new participants to be active. Fantasia, on the other hand, looks into the culture and being more conscious of the activities going on within the surroundings raising a sense of concern in individuals. The common concerns led to groupings to deal with the contentious issue. The capabilities of such organizations rather than their attitude dictated what was to transpire (Fantasia 123). However, social class never takes center stage in most American settings of the organization but mutual interest.

Such organizations come unexpectedly and engage in a common activity that is geared toward correction. Collective action is the way to go as they interact and encourage one another in solidarity. Confrontation of the responsible parties would be considered in this process as an emerging culture. For such a case, there comes a control of the prevailing condition with a change towards the people’s interest consideration. The striking force may experience a counterforce in the process same as the collective force withering a community.

I am concerned with mc Adams who looks into the plight of the new participants in such actions. He looks into their concern as being more vulnerable due to lack of experience and the excitement drive that would have them take part in more involved activities. They will in other words face the perils mere severely than the ones who have been in the movement for a long time. Class differences as put by fantasia to some extent give support to this argument.