The More the Merrier: Do Numbers Determine a Social Movement's Success? – Novel Hand

“Majority rule” is a principle in all things remotely democratic in our lives – from deciding what board game to play to determining important legislation in various forms of government. This idea can also be applied to social movements. Think about it – the more traction a social movement garners, the more likely governments will take action in enforcing legislation that will change the status quo. It is always said that the greater the number of supporters a movement has, the more likely change will be enacted. But how true is this notion?

Is Critical Mass Necessary to Create Change?

In the 1960s, Morton Grodzins, a political science professor at the University of Chicago, coined the term “critical mass” to describe white flight. This social phenomenon was when progressive white families who were tolerant of mixed race neighborhoods would continue residing in those neighborhoods until a tipping point, when more white families, a “critical mass,” were leaving the area. After that tipping point was reached, these families would then move out of the mixed neighborhood, essentially creating segregated areas.

The same principle can be applied to sociology. Critical mass describes a “group of people who make a drastic change, altering their behavior, opinions or actions” based on the actions of others. No matter whether a government is individualist or collectivist, humans at our core are highly interactive individuals, and the more people subscribe to a certain cause the likely it is that cause will gain traction and impact the way other people think. For example, social media has opened the doors for me to learn about different causes and organizations like Amnesty International and March For Our Lives. Checking out these organizations made me interested in engaging with these causes through petitions, donating, writing to Congressional leaders, and protests.

Numbers really matter for building power in ways that can really pose a serious challenge or threat to entrenched authorities or occupations.
Erica Chenoweth, Professor of Public Policy at Harvard Kennedy School

Black Lives Matter is one such movement that has been able to shift public opinion due to its ability to amass such a large following in recent years. A poll released by the Washington Post in 2020 found that 69 percent of Americans found that the way George Floyd was treated reflected a broader problem in the relationship between law enforcement and black people. Compare this to a poll in 2014 taken after Michael Brown’s death, when only 43 percent of Americans thought that this was a broader problem. The protests in 2020 held by the organization also garnered support from both sides of the aisle, with 87 percent of Democrats and 53 percent of Republicans supporting the cause.

More than Just the Numbers

While large numbers are helpful to promote a cause, they are not the end all be all to a social movement’s success. The most successful social movements are organized, focused on grassroot efforts, remain dedicated to changing social norms, and have incredible leadership. Changing social norms does not mean only appealing to governments and looking for legislative changes, but rather appealing to other potential advocates. A lot of organizations do this through slogans. For example, the LGBTQ+ movement restructured the central focus from “rights” to “love”, resulting in phrases like “Love is Love,” which helped the movement gain traction and led to legislative change.

Also, whereas critical mass promotes the idea of majority rule, Erica Chenoweth – Professor of Public Policy at Harvard Kennedy School – states that it only takes 3.5 percent of the population to have a successful movement. Not only does it take a small amount of the general public to enact social change, the most powerful movements are most often nonviolent. Nonviolent campaigns tend to be the most organized and automatically carry more supporters because of their peaceful nature, leading to political change 53 percent of the time compared to 26 percent for violent protests.

In addition, current movements have seen success based on the type of leadership that is employed. For example, many civil rights movements in the 1960s were led from a top-down perspective, with people in inner circles calling the shots. With social media being a main tool in activism now, social movements are taking leaderfull approaches. Leaderfull was a term coined by civil rights activist Ella Baker, and describes movements that are structured around groups of like-minded individuals who have a lived experience of a social problem and are, most importantly, empowered by grassroots leaders. Patrisse Cullors, co-founder of Black Lives Matter, relayed this sentiment in an interview with NPR stating, “I think there are many people leading this conversation, advancing this conversation…There [are] groups on the ground that have been doing this work, and I think we stand on the shoulders of those folks.”

Change rises up to the top, not the other way around.
Leslie Crutchfield, executive director of the Global Social Enterprise Initiative

So, it is important to consider the following question: Is it the number of voices, or how loud they are that determine a movement’s success? With the vast amount of social issues in society, the news cycle is constantly focusing on a new topic everyday, so just because a social movement gains traction during a certain period of time doesn’t mean that all of the supporters of that movement will remain involved in the cause. Following causes on social media, keeping updated and educating yourself about a particular issue you are interested in, and contacting your Congressional representatives are a few ways to ensure a social movement’s success.

If you are looking to create or effectively follow a movement, read the following articles for some ways to connect people to your cause!

“Slacktivist” to activist

Five Ways to Take Your Activism Offline