English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Contentious events often come in waves, but they are seldom homogeneous. A series of contentious events over the past two years were the result of the global financial crisis that began in the United States in 2008 and ultimately diffused around the world. But it was in Greece and the European Union that the crisis hit hardest. There, conventional protest, violence, and political contention combined. The Greek/Euro crisis has three lessons to teach us about the current themes in social movement research. The first lesson has to do with the nature of the capitalist crisis that triggered these events. The second lesson is that there are limits to globalization and internationalization. The third lesson is that while the financial crisis sparked a great deal of contention, it was differently affected by the political opportunity structure of each country. This article investigates three meanings of the term “social movement society” that became popular in the North in the 1990s: global movements; contained movements; and warring movements. It closes with some speculations about the relationship between the movements of recent years and protest policing and the increasing danger of suppression of all movements as the result of the fear of terrorism

política and sociedade

&lt;b&gt;Global, conventional and warring movements and the suppression of contention. Themes in contentious politics research&lt;/b&gt; &lt;br&gt;doi:10.5007/2175-7984.2011v10n18p25