Search Results

The Introduction situates the 15-M movement within contemporary debates about the crisis of democracy and the possibilities for progressive pro-democracy movements to regenerate democracy in the context of the twin crises of democracy and capitalism. It lays out the key questions and theoretical framework within which to understand the movement, engaging with critical democratic theory and social movement theory. It argues that as an influential, potent, sustained, and impactful pro-democracy movement, 15-M offers an excellent case study within which to examine contemporary debates about the relation between social movements and democracy. At the same time, as an autonomous movement, it defies common sense and (most) scholarly understandings of what makes a social movement “successful.” How and why it succeeded despite not meeting what are considered the necessary requirements forms the basis of the book’s contribution and steers us toward a new way of understanding the power and possibilities of autonomous movements today.

Chapter 1, “Spanish Democracy and 15-M,” explores the political opportunities provided by the historical, cultural, and economic context in which the movement emerged. It argues that translating economic grievances into sustained mobilization and protest requires the concerted effort of collective actors, as the variance in levels of mobilization across different European countries similarly affected by the crisis/austerity shows. It shows how in Spain one of the key strategies of the 15-M movement was to contest hegemonic narratives about the inevitability of the crisis and austerity, and the necessity of passing the costs of private bank bailouts onto the public. By framing the “democratic deficit” (i.e., the corrupt and uncaring political class) as responsible for both the crisis and its effects, the movement provided a powerful impetus for mobilization against both the economic-financial crisis and the legitimation crisis of “really existing” democracy. This ability to mobilize counter-hegemonic narratives helps explain different collective responses to similar material and political contexts; in other words, it helps make sense of why effective contestation can be found in some contexts (e.g., Spain) but not in others hit equally as hard (e.g., Ireland).

Chapter 3, “May 15, 2011: An Unexpected Detonator,” explores the central demands and evolution of the Madrid protest, showing how it established key frames that would later define the movement. These key frames brought together anti-austerity and pro-democracy demands that primarily targeted national political and economic elites. Activists worked hard behind the scenes to generate commitment to the protest across different movement families and sectors, and to draw newcomers in. The organizers were surprised by the strength of support, and by the end of the day some felt that that energy needed to be carried over into a more long-term mobilization. The analysis shows that although the protest itself was carefully planned and not spontaneous, its aftermath led to the spontaneous decision to remain in the Puerta del Sol. This act of civil disobedience and the repression it triggered produced the Acampada Sol “event” that would truly give birth to the 15-M movement.

Chapter 4, “Acampada Sol: the Chrysalis and the Crucible,” shows how the camp was a distinct “event” with a specific internal logic, and draws on participant testimonies to transmit the emotional experience of what was a life-changing event for participants. It argues that the camp was a chrysalis, a protected stage of development within which the 15-M movement was born, and a crucible, in that it served as a container into which old and new elements fused together under an exceptional situation of emotional intensity to create something new: a more consolidated ethos and political culture, as well as new sets of social relations that would go on to generate a broad network of interrelated assemblies, collectives, events, and political projects, all organized around a collective identity and a political culture referred to in Spain simply as “15-M.” Due to sustained and intense interaction in space and time, movement camps provide a unique opportunity for building the social capital that can develop from mobilization and sustain movements over time. In its deliberative and experiential experimentation with democracy, the camp engendered an emerging imaginary that coupled reform of democratic forms (in social, economic, and political institutions) with substantive content that drew on the key ideational frameworks of the movement traditions present in the square.

Chapter 5 analyzes the impact and significance of Acampada Sol for the development of the 15-M movement. Acampada Sol was one of many “occupation” camps that combined a pro-democracy and anti-austerity orientation. Demands for greater democracy form a central shared theme across a wide range of protest sites and forms of protest within and beyond Europe. But not all of these resulted in strong and sustained movements afterward, and not all mass mobilizations in times of crisis result in the emergence of social movements. This chapter argues that the experience of Acampada Sol had two crucial impacts that served to fuel and sustain the 15-M movement. The first was to establish democracy as the central problematic around which the movement cohered. The second was to consolidate a political culture and a collective identity that would sustain the movement, enabling it to expand and evolve. Autonomous, feminist, and hacker ethics forged a political culture that would strengthen the movement’s political identity and efficacy.

Part III, analyzes the 15-M network after occupation camps ended. The Introduction to Part III, provides an overview of the two main coordinating bodies that sought to give continuity to the Acampada Sol’s general assembly as a decision-making organ, and to structure to the post-occupation movement network in Madrid, showing that neither of them were capable of doing so. Instead of looking for a coordinating organization to find the parameters of the movement network, it argues that one can “find” the movement by delving into different 15-M initiatives and showing how their shared political culture and collective identity provide the glue that holds them together.

Chapter 8, “The PAH: Building a Movement within a Movement,” analyzes the Platform for those Affected by Mortgages (PAH), a widely admired and highly valued organization within 15-M, and also the one that addresses one of the austerity issues with the highest social, economic, and personal impact: the housing crisis. It shows how the PAH took this issue, which lies at the core of the Spanish financial crisis, and converted it into the basis for a powerful mass movement while developing a powerful and influential counter-narrative that connects groups across issues and organizational forms in 15-M.

Chapter 9, “Indignant and Precarious Youth,” explores Spain’s indignant “Youth Without Future” and how they are facing the post-crisis scenario by demanding the right to a dignified life and constituting a precarious political subject, “youth,” that greatly inspired the origins and development of the 15-M movement. From hunger strikers in the Puerta del Sol, to Juventud Sin Futuro (Youth Without Future, or JSF), to the Oficina Precaria (Precarious Office), these young activists creatively and passionately connect their lived experience directly with core austerity issues (education, housing, healthcare, precarious un/employment, and emigration), identifying a matrix of identifying those who are responsible for and benefit from austerity politics (bankers, etc.) against whom they direct their indignation. In so doing, they continually frame their activism in relation to the deficiencies of really existing democracy and contribute to the development of a new democratic imaginary, drawing on core elements of 15-M political culture and collective identity.

Chapter 10, “15-M and Podemos: Explaining the Puzzle of the ‘Electoral Turn,’ ” explores the relationship between 15-M and Podemos to answer a central puzzle that arises from the case of 15-M: How did so many members of a movement that was radically committed to critiquing representative democracy embrace the Podemos electoral initiative less than three years later while still claiming allegiance to the spirit and identity of the 15-M movement? It argues that party strategists engaged in extensive discursive work to overcome their cognitive dissonance and realign their activist identities to embrace an electoral option without reneging their 15-M identity. Podemos managed to convince 15-M activists by offering the promise of integrating core elements of 15-M political culture into the party, including autonomy, feminism, and a digitally enabled hacker ethic.

This chapter presents the major contributions of the book and the question of the role pro-democracy movements can play in democratic regeneration in times of crisis. It argues that their emancipatory potential lies in critique and resignification of the meaning of democracy, and in prefigurative experimentation in democratic practice. Activists in 15-M developed shared master frames about the crisis, austerity, and democracy that enabled them to not only develop a strong collective identity, but also to effectively contest hegemonic narratives used to justify austerity politics. In this way democracy also became one core factor in enabling cross-sectoral alliances, in both form (movement practices that prefiguratively embodied a “15-M” way of manifesting democratic principles) and in content (diagnoses of deficient democracy and new imaginaries proposed to correct these deficiencies).The chapter evaluates the impact and significance of the 15-M movement, and the potential for autonomous movements to reload democracy in times of crisis.

This chapter poses the large theoretical question of what generates cultural change or continuity, and provides examples of both patterns in the cases examined in the book. The large-scale program of commemorations of Portugal’s Carnation Revolution is treated in depth, taking it as an example of a mechanism providing for cultural continuity in that post-revolutionary polity. Obviously, revolution itself contributed earlier to cultural change in that case. In the Spanish case efforts to promote cultural change during the Zapatero years, in the 15-M movement, and more recently in contemporary politics are taken up. The analysis searches for mechanisms of cultural change but also offers observations on why it is typically difficult for efforts at cultural change to achieve success as broad as that to be found in revolutionary Portugal. Complex combinations of continuity and change are also taken up. Recent developments in both Spain and Portugal are examined.