logo

Cosmos

The Centre on Social Movement Studies

logo

The Many Frames of Precarious Condition. Some Insights from Italian Mobilization against Precarity

Alice Mattoni

Type: Chapter in edited book
Year: 2015

This chapter analyses the different frames that emerged during the mobilizations of precarious workers that occurred in Italy in the early 2000s, involving hundreds of thousands of protesters all over the country. In the past, workers’ movements had been rather homogeneous, representing workers who experienced very similar working and living conditions. In this sense, it was possible to speak about a rather homogeneous working class that developed mostly in the urban environment, around factories whose workers shared similar visions about themselves and their role in society. In advanced capitalistic societies, workers’ movements progressively lost their centrality in the struggles towards a more just society. At the same time, the trade unions, the institutional political actors that once represented them — also an outcome of workers’ movements — severely shrank in membership, with union density collapsing in the last decades. Workers, though, did not disappear from contentious politics. And neither did workers’ organizations, broadly conceived. Rather, they changed the way in which they engaged in protests, the organizational forms they selected to mobilize, and the discourses they elaborated around labour issues. This happened also because, despite the relevant heritage of unionism for workers, the very structure of the labour market changed dramatically in the past few decades.

Mattoni, A., 2015. The Many Frames of Precarious Condition. Some Insights from Italian Mobilization against Precarity. In D. della Porta et al., eds. The New Social Division. Making and Unmaking Precariousness. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave MacMillan. Availab

http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9781137509352_13

News

08/06/2017

Call for Papers - Cosmos Conference "The Contentious Politics of Higher Education. Student Movements in Late Neoliberalism"

alt
The Centre on Social Movement Studies, directed by Professor Donatella Della Porta, calls for papers addressing the recent global wave of student protests for a two-days conference to bel held in Florence, at the Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences of the Scuola Normale Superiore (SNS), on 15-16 November 2017.

19/05/2017

Video available for the International Conference – Beyond Borders: Refugees and Struggles in Europe Mobilization, Solidarity and Political Challenges in the Long Summer of Migration

alt
Watch the video of the International Conference – Beyond Borders, which was held at Palazzo Strozzi on May 12, 2017

19/05/2017

Marco Deseriis wins Best Paper Award at the Cedem17 Conference for e-Democracy & Open Government

alt
Dr. Marco Deseriis, Marie Curie Fellow and Research Fellow at Cosmos, has won the Best Paper Award at the Cedem17 Conference for e-Democracy & Open Government (Danube University, Krems Au Donau, Austria)

Publications

Journal Article - 2017

The Electoral Success of the Radical Left: Explaining the Least Likely Case of the Communist Party in Graz

Manès Weisskircher
Recently, scholars have shown a growing interest in radical left parties (RLPs). In terms of electoral success, the rise of the KPÖ Graz, the Communist Party in Austria’s second biggest city, represents perhaps the most counterintuitive case in Western Europe. This analysis shows how the party has managed to ‘own’ the issue of housing and to exploit local political opportunities in order to be electorally successful. The findings point to the importance of agency and the subnational level for RLPs, and highlight more general questions in the study of this party family.

Journal Article - 2017

Non-deliberative politics in deliberative democracy: distinct approaches for different actors

Andrea Felicetti
In this paper Andrea Felicetti first illustrates the main ideas of the systemic turn, explores the distinction between ‘deliberative’ and ‘non-deliberative’ politics and investigates the main arguments justifying non-deliberative politics. Then, he builds upon these arguments to shed new light on the relationship between deliberative and non-deliberative politics. He identifies three distinctive actors in deliberative systems (political institutions, empowered agents, and public space actors). Finally, he argues that deliberative democrats should adopt three different approaches (intensive, moderate, and free) in order to assess whether the use of non-deliberative politics by each of these actors is legitimate.