Interface: a journal for and about social movements Article

Volume X (X): ??? - ??? (Month Year) Surname, Short title

[The editors will fill in the header – please don’t touch!]

The Indignados Movement in Spain. Change Of

Essence or Change of Repertoire?

Pedro Ibarra and Ariel Sribman

Abstract
The goal of this analysis is not so much to study the process and evolution of
the movement of the indignados in Spain – also known as 15-M –, but to
analyse to what extent this movement brings about an innovative option,
specifically from the strategic perspective, if compared to the most common,
conventional strategies of social movements.
Keywords: social movements, indignados, 15-M, Spain, strategies, crisis,
austerity, identity.

Introduction: the Crisis

The point of departure is that of total crisis; the end of modernity – or at least of
what we knew as good modernity – with its features of predictability, regularity
and vocation for progress and equality (Alba et al., 2017; Bauman & Bordoni,
2016; Garcès, 2017).

The economic crisis

The development of the economic system – marked by globalization – of the

market, driven by the political, economic and financial elites with neoliberal
ideology, has established a scenario characterized by the growth of social
division. Social inequality increases, and the sectors excluded from the system
grow along with it. All this not as a critical but surmountable, temporary
conjuncture, but as a new scenario that can be defined as stable. This supposes
(let us now think of Western countries) that sectors and social groups excluded
from the system grow and, above all, stabilize in such exclusion – it’s the case
for the unemployed, contingent workers, young people, women, migrants, etc.
In fact, the austerity policies have not meant the attempt to temporarily adjust
the effects of the economic crisis. On the contrary, they are an expression, the
reinforcement of a new model of welfare state (now of un-welfare) that is
already presented as definitive. And that begins to be perceived as definitive by
the mentioned – and growing – marginalized sectors of the population.

1
Interface: a journal for and about social movements Article
Volume X (X): ??? - ??? (Month Year) Surname, Short title
[The editors will fill in the header – please don’t touch!]

Modernity, even with its limitations, assumed within it – incorporated with

different nuances from its ideologies – a certain consciousness that understood
the need, sometimes the quasi-inevitability, of a transforming social project,
with a horizon of greater equality and freedom. The end of modernity consists
precisely on the disappearance of this strategic cultural dimension. The only
project that exists is that of survival. Also, and above all (much more
consciously), in its economic and political leaders.
Consequently, on the other side, these growing and stable sectors of the
population thrown out of the economic system today have an attitude – a
culture? – of mixed distrust and severe hopelessness of rejoining the system
through the means of previous claim and access (pre-crisis). As we will see, on
an earlier stage those attitudes and corresponding behaviours were more
proactive, more functional, while they now appear settled in a mixture of
survival and the time of radicalism.

The political crisis

The other great relation in the crisis is the political crisis, the practical
disappearance of democracy (Bergantiños & Ibarra, 2018; Castells, 2017;
Graeber, 2013; Mair, 2013). To move forward, a certain definition of democracy
is necessary. However, what follows is not so much a definition of democracy
but rather the description of a democratic process that has been moving
historically towards democratic demands considered constitutive, defining. This
description – rather than conception – has therefore a dynamic character.
Democracy is a process aimed at achieving maximum equality for all in an
operational access to public spaces where political decisions are made.
And democracy falls into crisis when in the process the deficiencies in equality
and operability worsen and spread. In particular, when there is a total lack/loss
of correspondence in the electoral process; the disappearance of the relation –
what we, the represented citizens, want, affects (or is) in some way what you,
the representatives, do – the disappearance of this relation constitutes the
central scenario of the current democratic crisis.
The emptying of representation is the result of a specific and temporally
delimitable change to the worst of the democratic model. The process of
globalization and the evolution of the parties have meant that the content of the
representation – what represented people propose and what representatives
decide – has practically disappeared. Globalization has reinforced the political
parties’ strategic option of maximizing the support of indeterminate citizens’
interests – nothing that is concrete or demandable is represented – in order to
achieve its only objective: to occupy the space of power. The connections, the
bonds that – sometimes in too subtle a way – existed, have been extinguished.

2
Interface: a journal for and about social movements Article
Volume X (X): ??? - ??? (Month Year) Surname, Short title
[The editors will fill in the header – please don’t touch!]

Not only we find ourselves in a position of non-coincidence in the dynamics of

representative democracy. The very idea that it is necessary to articulate a
confluence around a content has disappeared or is pure rhetoric. The
representatives, the parties, have desisted from representing the interests of
their represented. The political will of the latter is no longer found in this
democratic channel. Almost in no way these citizen political wills can be found
within the institutional political decisions. Therefore, the absolute marginality
of democracy is verified in this process of construction of the general will.
As in the previous case, the crisis has come to stay. Politicians, political
institutions, de facto powers, assume that a model of representation or
participation that leads citizens to decision-making political spaces is not
possible. It is assumed that the aforementioned disconnection is inevitable. And
desirable. Consequently, the (their) only goal is that of (political) survival, of
sustaining this system while stopping the absence of democracy from generating
radical processes of social confrontation and substantial changes upon their
very interests.
On the other side, from the whole of the population in general and especially
those excluded from the system who perceive and experience the above
mentioned disconnection, the certainty about the infeasibility of introducing
their interests in the operational political will of their representatives continues
to grow. Disaffection towards the systems of conventional democratic
representation grows as well, and especially towards the role played by political
parties in it. No doubt this does not cause a process of general abstention, of
total rejection of the conventional political scenario, but it does cause, as we
shall see, the emergence of a new democratic culture that fosters both other
forms of access to the political space and the possibility of the absolute no
access.

The ideological crisis

The crisis of modernity has also dragged ideologies. Its blurring or practical
disappearance has been clear in the transformative ideologies, those that have
formed the motor of collective action, which have generated collective
convictions that have been mobilized towards the taking of political positions of
social and political change.
Without a doubt, today the ruling classes – political and economic – are not
moved by great ideologies either. One of the typical features of ideology:
providing the assurance that in the future the transformation conditions will be
given (in the case of rights, the conditions for their maintenance), does not seem
to exist either in globalization or in neoliberalism. The only thing that exists in
these two realms are tactics and strategies to survive without changing anything.

3
Interface: a journal for and about social movements Article
Volume X (X): ??? - ??? (Month Year) Surname, Short title
[The editors will fill in the header – please don’t touch!]

Where, however, the ideological crisis has the greatest effect, as we shall see, is
in the social sectors and their movements, which have opted for strategies of
transformation.

Defining the spaces

Taking into account these new crisis scenarios of the economic and political
system (or, more precisely, of change with a tendency to be definitive), it is time
to observe how the movementist response was (mainly of social movements),
and how it is now, as from this new circumstance.
The concepts of ‘before’ and ‘now’ are decidedly approximate. In this sense,
what we intend is to establish a framework, general features of a process of
social and political confrontation that we can place before, or perhaps more
precisely in the last phase before the beginning of the economic crisis, a phase
that describes the social movements in their most recent phase; in the most
established phase of the pre-crisis moment.
On the other hand, the other process, that of now, is located not so much in the
beginning of the crisis but in the current situation, defined by the perpetuity of
that economic crisis with the consequences described above.
In the account of these processes with their features, we will establish only
tendencies, and obviously there will be many exceptions. However, under the
description there are, and at some point will be cited, certain experiences of
social movements, basically from the Spanish case and some examples of the
Western world.

An account of “the old ones” (McAdam, Tilly & Tarrow, 2001;

Ibarra, 2005; Ibarra & Letamendia, 2015)

We refer to the ‘traditional’ movements: workers, ethnicists and civil rights,

among others, as well as the ‘new’ – gender, ecology, etc. – of the 60s. These are
movements that arise from concrete grievances and are led by those affected by
such grievances, which seek specific satisfaction from them but move towards
becoming movements with programs and general objectives, aimed at achieving
substantial changes in certain aspects of coexistence and social, political, human
relations as a whole; justice in labor relations, civil rights, gender equality, a
sustainable environment, etc.
These ‘old’ movements acted (and continue to act) through different forms and
resources of action in the social space, claiming that the political institutions
they exercise pressure upon with their mobilization establish political changes,
and demanding reforms from both State and government. They also understand
that, although they emerge as a response to the distrust that political parties are
worthy of, in their most conventional phase – pre-crisis – they tend to believe

4
Interface: a journal for and about social movements Article
Volume X (X): ??? - ??? (Month Year) Surname, Short title
[The editors will fill in the header – please don’t touch!]

that political parties also can also, also must, and also will in fact carry out that
social transformation. In another way, and regardless of their rhetorical
statements, they act according to and believe in the strategic complementarity of
social claim. On the one hand, the pressure towards institutions; on the other
hand, the support or search for complicity with political parties – or some
political parties – that are in the institutions.
In essence, they were not – they are not – anti-system. They do not advocate
another economic model based on the disappearance (or marginalization) and
corresponding substitution of the capitalist market system. Nor, in addition to
their criticism of the distant political representation, they demand a new
democratic model, a new model of participation and political representation.
However, these social movements are critical of the dominant system of political
and social organization. In this field, movements do maintain that point of
distrust and distance (today become relative, as we saw) in front of the parties,
maintaining the internal organization of movements more participatory, more
open, more horizontal, more assembly stlye, more democratic in the denser
sense of the term. In any case, these movements have also produced a certain
drift towards processes of greater internal bureaucratization, of hierarchization.
In a way, at least in part, they have entered the dominant system, characterized
by vertical and normative organization.
It should also be noted that these movements, in which the use of collective
action of a very confrontational and in some cases decidedly radical nature was
historically dominant, have evolved, beginning to use more cooperative
resources, more dialogue with institutions and political or economic elites. The
radical dimension, originally constitutive of the movements – which, along with
other characteristics, caused them to separate substantially from the parties –,
has brought them closer to the latter through the described evolution.
In the identity and discursive question, these movements with their reference
ideologies have been feeding – and orienting – their sense of community
belonging, their collective identity. Complementarily, in their discourse, both
inwardly and towards the search for understanding and support from the
outside, the message aimed at contacting the frameworks of beliefs available in
society – usually connected with ideological references – has had a special
presence.
In this line, and regarding the sociological composition and the level of
commitment of the members of the movement, in its origins they were
composed mainly of those most directly affected by the grievance, for which, in
turn, being militants within the movement was an essencial part of their
identity. But again they evolve. Participation grows in the movements of citizens
not directly affected by the grievance that is denounced, and who seek a general
resolution for society as a whole. In this sense, it grows in sectors of the
population with moderate well-being and with ideological convictions aimed at
the search for a fairer, more equal world. The number of sympathizers,
adherents and activists to a limited time grows, in demerit of the number of

5
Interface: a journal for and about social movements Article
Volume X (X): ??? - ??? (Month Year) Surname, Short title
[The editors will fill in the header – please don’t touch!]

militants. The intensity of the collective identity is lost, based on the

commitment to complete devotion to the movement cause – and to its
organization.
Characteristic of this stage is the emergence and extension of solidarity
movements that should best be defined as public interest groups, or NGOs in all
their dimensions, characterized by the fact that since their inception their
members are not affected by the grievances – inequalities, oppressions – that
define and mark the demands of their elimination by the groups/movement.
Those are movements of solidarity with other countries and groups, cooperation
for development, aid for migrants. At the same time, from the start they also
organize, and act and use, forms of action that are not characteristic of the
dimensions and alternative practices, at least constitutive at the beginning, of
social movements. More cooperative strategies, more institutionalization.
With regard to the strategies of these social movements as a whole, to achieve
the success of their demands, to grow as a movement, to make a speech more
accessible and more impactful, they will take into account the existing political
situation, the changes in the presence of some or other parties in the political
power, in the more or less authoritarian or participative attitudes of the political
institutions, etc. In this sense, they will adapt their strategy to the current
conjunctural fluctuations.
Finally, it is necessary to make a brief mention of the impacts of these
movements. It is not time to make a complete analysis of everything that these
movements have achieved, but we consider important to point out a moment of
impact that, as we shall see, has a different dynamic in the current movements.
We refer to how their demands are present both in the political institutions and
in the public policies that arise from them. It is worth indicating that the impact
of these movements, when it occurs, is present in the proposals and decisions
made by the political parties in that institutional space. They are, therefore, in a
mediated space.

A story of “the current ones”

The main group of movements today, or at least the most characterized and
known for their novelty, are the so-called “of the outraged” (indignados).
Among them we must mention the Spanish 15-M and Nuit Debout in France. In
them, and also in other relevant movements in other countries, the new
characterization of the political that takes place within the framework of their
confrontational process stands out.
These are not movements that set in motion a vindictive strategy of pressure
towards political institutions. They are movements that deny, that reject both
the political and the economic system. For them, vindictive pressure is in no
way related to access of movements into political institutions – let alone their
constant presence in them. Democracy can’t be conceived as the flow of social

6
Interface: a journal for and about social movements Article
Volume X (X): ??? - ??? (Month Year) Surname, Short title
[The editors will fill in the header – please don’t touch!]

will towards politicians who occupy power and who supposedly represent
citizens. There is no such flow because there are no contents in that relationship
between representatives and represented. It is an empty relationship, and one
constructed to remain empty. Therefore, it makes no sense to try to influence on
the political decision-making process by exercising pressure on those
disconnected representatives. And still less does it make sense to continue
seeking parliamentary support from the parties to assume and share the
vindications and demands of the movement. The movement, from its solitude,
from its marginality, proposes a strategy of strict autonomy. A strategy, an
option, a discourse and a practice based on the rejection – the radical negation
– of the existing system.
This means that these types of movements tend not to advance proposals for
alternative general social and economic policies. It is a paralysis – or perhaps
passivity – caused both by discouragement fueled by their permanent status of
marginality, which makes it difficult for them to construct proposals that appear
as possible operating within the system, as well as for the loss and mistrust in
the face of historical emancipatory ideologies. In a way they have renounced a
stable organization, aimed at achieving a program and a general horizon of
transformation, and take refuge in specific actions within society, aimed at self-
management of spaces and services that pretend to prefigure a substantially
new society. The option for autonomy in society. They embody the option to
transform from outside the system.
Paradoxically (only apparently), this option for the rejection of the political
system from isolation, alternative construction in the social space, has provoked
the start-up of new political parties that have their roots precisely in these
actually existing anti-party social movements. The new response is based on
seeking a third political path from the social mobilization: that is neither the
political pressure directed towards the institutions, nor the support to pre-
existing political parties. Without rejecting or replacing the option of the
autonomous isolationist movement, there is the possibility of a new form of
political intervention. It is the party with experience and forms of action
movement that is introduced into the conventional political space. And here the
fundamental democratic demand, to make better or worse public policies, more
or less acceptable to social groups or movements, but especially to do politics in
a different way within the institutions themselves, does not acquire special
importance; introduce greater participation, greater protagonism both of social
groups, of movements, and of their own new parties in the conventional
decision-making process.
Comparing them with the previous ones, in these new movements – and in a
certain way also in the above described movements/party – there is, at least in
their origins, a rejection of the existing political system, as soon as its
democratic character is denied. And there is a rejection of the economic system
insofar as the capitalist market system is considered constitutively aimed at
building injustice, inequality, misery and exploitation.

7
Interface: a journal for and about social movements Article
Volume X (X): ??? - ??? (Month Year) Surname, Short title
[The editors will fill in the header – please don’t touch!]

The movements do not establish a program for a new economic and political
system. The tendency is to stay out of the system and build another system of
alternative social coexistence through, at the moment, only specific social and
self-managed experiences. It is true that movements/parties do enter the
electoral and political space, and do so with programs that in some aspects
contain really different systemic proposals. But it should not be forgotten that
these movements/parties are not instruments of the indignado movements. It is
an option for a new political party that, on the other hand, has very limited
possibilities to make operationally anti-system policies.
They are movements of a generalist nature, vertebrated by the overwhelming
rejection of the existing system and the proposal of a – certainly diffuse –
horizon, of a new and totally transformed society/community. In previous
movements, the demand for general transformations comes from an evolution
based on specific grievances, to which more ideologized social sectors are
incorporated, with the corresponding evolution in the movement, from affected
to militants – and later to participants. In the current movements, on the other
hand, given the sectors affected by this permanent systemic crisis, and given the
existing ideological gaps, the protagonism of both the directly aggrieved and the
militancy are maintained from the beginning.
 
On the other hand, in recent years, mobilizations and response movements to
more common and concrete grievances – labour, environmental, gender,
economic, urban, etc. – have been appearing. Movements directly dedicated to
ending this specific situation of grievance. We are referring to the fight against
evictions, against energy poverty, against labour situations of extreme
exploitation, against unbearable urban conditions, etc.
No doubt they are not inserted in the previous scenario of a radical and absolute
rejection of the economic and political system. Thus, they seek with their
pressure, and with usually very radical and very confrontational actions, to
achieve concrete changes, coming from their interlocutors: political institutions
and business actors. However, if we compare them with the equivalents of
previous times, some differences can be observed. In their marginality (they are
one of the most visible expressions of those who are already outside the system)
they tend to opt for autonomous strategies – or at least autonomous attitudes.
Thus, there is a lack of confidence in the possibilities of achieving agreements
with institutions and other economic actors or leaders through dialogue and
negotiation, as well as trust in the support of existing political parties.
Along with this lack of confidence, localism becomes evident, with a social
background of little experience of movement and insufficient cultural level – at
least of ideological affiliation. Unlike the groups of these characteristics that
arose in previous times, they do not tend to be integrated, to be part of their
reference movements, where there are already more joint strategies directed to
the social transformation. They remain isolated and, following the same

8
 Interface: a journal for and about social movements Article
Volume X (X): ??? - ??? (Month Year) Surname, Short title
[The editors will fill in the header – please don’t touch!]

trajectory of their neighbors – the movements of indignados – they maintain

the protagonism of the militancy coming from those affected by the grievance.

This alternative – and now we refer to all treated movements (indignados,

response to specific grievances, solidarity, nationalism) – is presented:

a) In the organizational dimension. Summarizing, we can affirm that the

distrust in front of conventional systems of organization coming from
and advocated by the existing system is even more forceful in all these
current movements. This leads them to remain firm in their assembly,
horizontal, informal, participatory option, etc. and to stay away from the
processes of bureaucratization and hierarchization present in the
previous movements.

b) In the identity and in the speech dimension. The first one appears more
dense, more daily, more grounded and experienced as a firm sense of
belonging of the militant to a concrete group, strongly identified by its
differential character, its marginality and its style of action. It is another
form of identity if we compare it with previous movements, with a
collective identity rather characterized by sharing an analysis of reality
and a project to change it. This also means differences with respect to
their discourse. If in previous movements the discourse was rather
directed to gain support from critical political cultures and ideologies, the
current ones achieve solidarity more by their attitudes and by their call to
emotional responses derived from flagrant injustices.

In the use of the conjuncture. Finally, ‘old’ and ‘new’ movements use the
existing political (and also economic) structures and conjunctures in their favor.
But in the past, this mechanism was more based on the conjunctural changes,
on the opportunities that provide certain conjunctural changes. In the current
ones, it is the permanent crisis – the breakdown and inequality of and in the
systemic structures – that grants the opportunities – or, more accurately, guides
the strategic options – for mobilization.

Table I. Pre-crisis versus Post-crisis Social Movements

Pre-crisis Social Movements Post-crisis Social Movements

Trigger/origin Specific grievances General grievances

Goals Specific – become general Specific – remain specific

Pressure on institutions, but also

Relation with institutions Denial and rejection
complicity with parties

9
 Interface: a journal for and about social movements Article
Volume X (X): ??? - ??? (Month Year) Surname, Short title
[The editors will fill in the header – please don’t touch!]

Anti-system No Yes
Assembly-based, horizontal, open,
Assembly-based, horizontal, open,
Organisation democratic – becomes beaurocratic
democractic – remain so
and hierarchical

Confrontation and radicality –

Repertoire
Identity and discourse
Confrontation and radicality –
evolution into cooperation and
remain so
dialogue
Dense identity within the
Very important. Wider community
movement, strong belonging
belonging and collective identity.
within, but marginalization from
Discourse appealing to whole
society. Emotional-radical
society
discourse against specific injustices

Affected by specific grievances,

Affected by specific grievances +
Composition strong identity – evolution to
supporters from the start
supporters, weaker identity
Adaptation in order to achieve Permanent crisis à permanent
Circumstances
bigger impact window of opportunity

A brief synthesis

It is not a matter of elaborating a detailed and “scientifically” argued

relationship about differences and similarities between ones and the other
movements. Our approach to the issue is – perhaps too much so – speculative,
and reality presents too many exceptions that contradict excessively strong
statements, which implies – among other things – that it would be very risky to
proclaim that there is a new wave of social movements. However, we do believe
that at least some attention should be paid to considering that the two
mentioned causes – the systemic economic crisis and the crisis of democracy –
somehow have a certain role in the creation and promotion of the described
tendencies of current movements, especially in their relations with the political
and in its greater alternation and radicality in the processes of organization and
confrontation.

References
Apple, Michael 2006. Educating the "right" way: markets, standards, God and
equality. New York: Routledge.
Alba, Santiago; Appadurai, Arjun; Bauman, Zygmunt; Della Porta, Donatella;
Fraser, Nancy; Garcés, Marina; Illouz, Eva; Krastev, Ivan; Latour, Bruno;
Mason, Paul; Mishra, Pankaj; Misik, Robert; Nachtewey, Oliver; Rendueles,
César; Streeck, Wolfgang; Van Reybrouck, David and Zizek, Slavoj 2017. El
gran retroceso. Barcelona, Seix Barral.

10
Interface: a journal for and about social movements Article
Volume X (X): ??? - ??? (Month Year) Surname, Short title
[The editors will fill in the header – please don’t touch!]

Bauman, Zygmunt and Bordoni, Carlo 2016. Estado de crisis. Barcelona:

Paidós.
Bergantiños, Noemí and Ibarra, Pedro 2018. “El estado de la cuestión:
perspectivas y propuestas frente a la crisis de la democracia”, in Respuestas y
propuestas de regeneración frente a la crisis democrática, edited by Pedro
Ibarra and Noemí Bergantiños. Madrid, Tecnos.
Castells, Manuel 2017. Ruptura; la crisis de la democracia liberal. Madrid:
Alianza.
Cox, Laurence 2018. Why Social Movements Matter. An Introduction. London.
Rowman and Littlefield.
Della Porta, Donatella 2015. Social Movements in Times of Austerity.
Cambridge: Polity.
Della Porta, Donatella; Fernández, Joseba; Kouki, Hara and Mosca, Lorenzo
2017. Movement parties against austerity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Della Porta, Donatella, O’Connor, Francis; Portos, Martin and Subirats, Anna
2017. Social Movements and Referendums from Below. Direct Democracy in
the Neoliberal Crisis. University of Bristol Policy Press.
Fishman, Robert 2012. “On the Significance of Public Protest in Spanish
Democracy”, pp. 351-366 in Democràcia, Política i Societat: Homenatge a
Rosa Virós, edited by Jacint Jornada, Vicenç Navarro, Francesc Pallarés and
Ferran Requejo. Barcelona: UPF.
Garcès, Marina 2017. Nueva ilustración radical. Barcelona: Nuevos cuadernos
Anagrama.
Graeber, David 2013. The Democracy Project: A history, a crisis, amovement.
New York: Random House.
Ibarra, Pedro 2005. Manual sobre sociedad civil y movimientos sociales.
Madrid: Síntesis.
Ibarra, Pedro and Letamendia, Francisco 2015. “Los Movimientos Sociales”, in
Manual de Ciencia Politica, edited by Miquel Caminal. Madrid: Tecnos (4th
edition).
Mair, Peter 2013. Ruling The Void: The Hollowing Of Western Democracy.
London: Verso.
McAdam, Doug; Tilly, Charles and Tarrow, Sydney 2001. Dynamics of
Contention. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nez, Heloïse and Ernesto Ganuza 2018. “Among militants and deliberative
laboratories: the indignados”, in Crisis and Social Mobilization in
Contemporary Spain, edited by Benjamín Tejerina and Ignacia Perugorría.
London: Routledge.
Romanos, Eduardo 2016. “Late neoliberalism and its indignados: contention in
austerity Spain”, pp. 131-167 in Late Neoliberalism and its Discontents in the

11
Interface: a journal for and about social movements Article
Volume X (X): ??? - ??? (Month Year) Surname, Short title
[The editors will fill in the header – please don’t touch!]

Economic Crisis: Comparing Social Movements in the European Periphery,

edited by Donatella Della Porta, Massimiliano Andretta, Tiago Fernandes,
Francis O’Connor, Eduardo Romanos and Markos Vogiatzoglou. New York:
Palgrave.

About the author

Bio (in third person) with contact email in the form jane.bloggs AT gmail.com

12