No description available.

Doctor of Philosophy / Department of Sociology, Anthropology, and Social Work / Robert K. Schaeffer / This paper asks why a progressive social movement formed in a conservative place. The People for a Progressive University City (PPUC) formed as a Political Action Committee (PAC) in a mid-sized community in order to influence the city commission and school board election of 2005. Resource Mobilization theory assumes that social movements form when they have access to resources including money, networks and leadership (Barkan 1979, McCarthy and Zald 1977). Political Opportunity theory assumes that social movements form when opportunities for mobilization are visible (Goodwin, Jaspers and Jaswin 1999, Tarrow 1996). The Framing Perspective assumes that social movements form when they describe grievances and their solutions in a way that is reasonable to potential participants (Benford and Snow 2000, Gamson and Modigliani 1989). I have taken an Action Research approach to understand what developments led to the organization’s formation and which theory best described why the movement formed in 2005. Through 31 in-depth interviews with community members, I concluded that no one theory alone can explain why the organization formed. I argue that the best theoretical explanation is a synthesis of all three. I outline several theoretical implications as well as practical implications for community organizing in University City. I argue that the future of the PPUC will depend on how it responds to changes in community discontent and if it is able to mobilize people. Additionally, I suggest the story of the PPUC has implications for the study of social movements in general.

No description available.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-29T13:48:38Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Lucas Vasconcelos Pinto.pdf: 1257292 bytes, checksum: 2f6cd0aef546c8363a31effa69ceec9c (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-05-04 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / This work has as its theme the influence of The American Israel Public Affairs Committee AIPAC in the foreign policy of the United States US. Firstly it was systematized a state of the art on the subject based on two main lines of thought: one of John Mearsheimer and Stephen walt and another of Noam Chomsky Gilbert Achcar and Norman Finkelstein. While those ones highlight the power of the so called Pro-Israel lobby - from which AIPAC is the most structured and renowned organization - in US politics those second ones point out that the helm of US foreign policy toward Israel is its own national interest not the Lobby. Secondly it was aimed a historical survey about AIPAC and an analysis of its structure and its procedures. It was founded then that AIPAC - as a lobbying organization an interest group - according to the law cannot make financial contributions directly to politicians. It was founded however that this practice may occur indirectly through at least two ways: through its own members contributing individually and/or by Political Action Committees PACs - institutions created specifically to this end of raising funds to political campaigns in order to elect and defeat candidates or even to influence those who are already in the Government. And thirdly it was sought to synthesize the state of the art to the historical and structural study on AIPAC. Based on the dialogue of the two main theoretical visions worked - under a optic of complementarity rather than of exclusion - alongside with an examination of AIPAC s action in history this study led us to infer that AIPAC which was founded in 1959 in the Cold War context remains being influential in US politics even with the change in the international system at the end of the Cold War. / O presente trabalho tem como tema a influencia do American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) na politica externa dos Estados Unidos da América (EUA). Primeiro, sistematizou- se um estado da arte sobre o tema a partir de duas linhas de pensamento principais: uma de John Mearsheimer e Stephen Walt; e outra, de Noam Chomsky, Gilbert Achcar e Norman Finkelstein. Enquanto aqueles primeiros ressaltam o poder do chamado lobby pró-Israel - do qual o AIPAC e a organização mais estruturada e renomada - na politica dos EUA, estes salientam que o leme da politica externa estadunidense para com Israel e seu próprio interesse nacional, e não o lobby. Segundo, visou-se a um levantamento histórico sobre o AIPAC e a uma analise de sua estrutura e de seu modo de atuação. Constatou-se, então, que o AIPAC - como uma organização de lobby, um grupo de interesse -, de acordo com a lei, não pode enviar contribuições financeiras diretamente aos políticos. Apurou-se, no entanto, que essa prática pode ocorrer de maneira indireta, por meio de, pelo menos, duas maneiras: através de seus próprios membros contribuindo individualmente; e/ou por via dos Political Action Committees (PACs) - instituições criadas especificamente para esse fim de levantar fundos para as campanhas politicas no intuito de eleger e derrotar candidatos, ou ate mesmo influenciar os que já estão no governo. E, terceiro, buscou-se sintetizar o estado da arte ao estudo histórico e estrutural sobre o AIPAC. Com base no diálogo entre as duas principais visões teóricas trabalhadas - sob uma ótica de complementaridade ao invés de exclusão -, ao lado do exame da ação do AIPAC na história, esse estudo nos levou a inferir que o AIPAC, fundado em 1959, no contexto da Guerra Fria, continua influente na politica dos EUA, mesmo com a mudança no sistema internacional ao final da Guerra Fria