Sidney Tarrow et. al. The New Transnational Activism (2005).

* Tarrow emphasizes activist’s embeddedness in local contexts – They are rooted cosmopolitans

He asks three questions

* 1. How have transnational connections affected the goals, frames, strategies and perhaps identities of local activists?

* 2. To what extent has the increase in transnational activism create a space for contentious politics – a sphere of global civic activism – that fuses the local with the global?

* 3. To what extent has transnational activism so blurred the lines of the global and the local that it becomes impossible to think of them as separate spheres?



* Stresses the importance of internationalizaion vs. externalization of international conflict

* Concludes by saying that it is premature to speak of a global activism which fuses the local and the international



== Notes ==

* Transnational activists are both constrained and supported by domestic networks

* Method – Identifying and tracing the processes that link the domestic to the international level of activism


What’s different today?

* Diffusion, international mobilization and the modularity of protest are all familiar

* 1) Its connection to the current wave of globalization

* 2) Its relation to the changing structure of international politics


Internationalism channels resistance to globalization – it provides an opportunity structure within which transnational activism can emerge


Three orders of processes that link domestic activism to the international system

* 1. Local

** Global framing

** Internationalization

* 2. Transitional

** Diffusion

** Scale shift

*3. Global

** Externalization

** International coalition formulation


Question: Are we witnessing a short cycle of internationally oriented domestic contention, or a fusion between international and domestic contention politics?