By Sally Raskoff

There has been a lot of collective
action around the country after the George Zimmerman murder trial verdict.
Protests about his not being found guilty of murder or manslaughter of Trayvon Martin,
protests about the legal issues in court trials, protests about the “Stand Your Ground”
laws.

I am reminded of what happened after the 1992 trial verdict
regarding Rodney King’s
beating by police officers. The days following that verdict started
similarly with public protests about how those officers were found not guilty,
yet much is different.

The 1992 uprising (or riots) happened primarily in Los
Angeles, where the event and trial took place but other cites across the nation
also had gatherings that erupted into violence and destruction. In 2013, the
event and trial were in Florida but gatherings have taken place across the
country.

The cases involve different types of people and events. The
King case involved police against an individual while the Zimmerman case
involves two civilian individuals. The King case involved a beating captured on
video while the Zimmerman case involved a killing. Both victims, Martin and
King, are African American men.

The social context is also very different between these two
time periods. In 1992, the U.S. President was George H.W. Bush (and he was running
for re-election) while in 2013, we have an African-American president, Barack
Obama. Aladdin and Wayne’s World were popular movies in
1992. In 2013, social media is a large part of our lives with mobile devices
and apps such as Facebook and Twitter. Economically, both time periods have
challenges and military actions in the Middle East continue.

In 1992, the Los Angeles police department was slow to
respond to the gatherings. In 2013, law enforcement and other officials have
been present and verbal about the situation. President Obama took his time to
weigh in but eventually gave
thoughtful comments intended to help people on all sides of the issue pause
and think about the other perspectives and the cultural context in which this
situation exists.

We’ve seen protests erupting about the country since the
verdict, with many protestors wearing “I Am Trayvon” placards and other
messages about justice. Most of the protests have been well organized –
primarily through social media – and peaceful.

“Bash mobs” did roam through Los Angeles and possibly some
other locations, and these were also organized through social media. Small
groups of young people ran through some urban spaces, hitting people and taking
property. These events were not as common as the larger more diverse groups
protesting the verdict, the laws, and calling for changes in the legal system
and in social awareness of institutional racism.

There are many theories of collective behavior that can help
us explain why King and Zimmerman events have, so far, worked out so
differently. Karen
Sternheimer’s blog on the twentieth anniversary of the 1992 uprising
discusses some of these theories.

Collective behavior can take the shape of crowds in which
people are gathered temporarily in the same place. Acting crowds (as
opposed to casual or expressive crowds) can become mobs or riots (or panics);
mobs typically have some goal or object of focus while riots are unfocused but
both are emotional and can be highly destructive and violent. Sociologists
Clark McPhail and Ronald T. Wohlstein suggest that protest crowds are
another type of crowd with specific political goals .

Social Movements exist when collective behavior continues
over time to address specific problem(s) in society. Social movements go
through three general stages: incipience or emergence in which the problem is
identified, coalescence in which resources are gathered and action is taken;
routinization or bureaucratization in which formal structures develop to foment
structural changes in society; and decline in which such structures are no
longer needed because the problem is solved or deemed unimportant or
unsolvable.

How do these concepts apply to the Trayvon Martin gatherings?

Most of these gatherings can be classified as Protest Crowds
since they do have an overarching political goal of equality under the law. Emergent
Norm Theory can be useful here since leaders emerge (those who organize and
speak at the gathering) and they provide a context in which political pressure
is put on society rather than letting the emotions of the crowd be less focused
on social change.

The Acting crowds that turned in to both mobs and riots in
1992 were fueled by just as much anger but by much less organization and
leadership.

Even the so-called “bash” mobs are more organized and can be
explained, perhaps, by Convergence
Theory. This theory holds that people are drawn to such crowds to “reveal
their true self” or otherwise do what they already have a disposition to do.
Thus people who are perhaps less concerned with legal justice but more
concerned with running through the streets taking things or being destructive
wee this as an opportunity to do so.

The existence of the Occupy movement might also help explain
why the protests are more focused and peaceful. Occupy Wall Street and other
related groups have provided a model for peaceful discussion of social
problems. Whether this can build into a social movement and move from emergence
(identifying the problem) to coalescence (mobilizing resources and taking
action) remains to be seen. Aligning such issues with the Civil Rights movement
organizations that have long been routinized can reinvigorate both movements.

What other sociological concepts can help us understand the
collective action surrounding the Trayvon Martin shooting?