In answering this question, the researcher must consider the definitions of both status and class from an economic, social and historical point of view. Other questions that must be answered vary from where does power lie in social circles? What impact did industrialism have upon the class structure and social movements? And what causes people to participate in social movements?

Weber, discussing his theory on the features of both a status movement and a class movement, mentions differences between social groups in the social prestige they are granted by others. Status movement characteristics often vary exclusively of class divisions, and social honour can either be positive or negative. As Weber (Ritzer, 2000: 123) stated,

"Status situation [is] ... every typical component of the life of men that is determined by a specific, positive or negative, social estimation of honour."

People who have high prestige in a given social order tend to become participants of positively privileged status movements. Negatively privileged social groups, such as Par

Postindustrialism verifies that there are a more expansive set of social and demographic changes, showing that traditional social controls have been slackened by social changes, and have fostered a new postmaterialist political culture. In some definitions, new social movements have been traced to the formulation of new collective identities in the context of the looser social controls of postindustrial societies. Inglehart (1990) shows the links of affluent backgrounds and generational change to postmaterialist values and protest.

iah groups, are often discriminated against, and participants are often excluded from taking advantage of opportunities that most other people in society have.

Neil Smelser (Della Porta & Diani, 1999: 8) spent most of his time studying collective behaviour, and has concluded that social movements are the side-effects of excessively rapid social transformation. When swift, large-scale transformations occurred, the emergence of collective behaviours had a double meaning. On the one hand, it reflected the incapable reproduction of social cohesion by social institutions and social control mechanisms; and on the other, society's efforts to react to crisis situations by developing shared beliefs, on which to base new foundations for collective solidarity. James Coleman (1990) stated that situations of frustration, rootlessness, deprivation, and social crisis automatically give rise to movements, and sums up such movements to an accumulation of individual behaviour.

In order to make the transformation to a highly developed movement to an established political force, a social movement must bureaucratise, i.e. develop structures (stage three). As procedures are formalised, the leader's qualities, charisma and talents are less depended upon for the move forward. Instead, a capable staff becomes more beneficial in the organization of the movement. Social movements that avoid this stage usually have short lives, fading when leaders lose energy or charisma, or even die. However, bureaucratisation can weaken a movement by blunting its radical and innovative edge or else offer a steady voice on behalf of its participants.

Some common words found in the essay are:
Weber Ritzer, Maconis Plummer, Porta Diani, , Jenkins Perrow, Information Revolution, social movements, James Coleman, McCarthy Wald, social movement, porta diani, della porta, social controls, della porta diani, status movement, Della Porta, looser social controls, costs benefits, set social, calculation costs, 2000 123, movement class movement, calculation costs benefits, weber ritzer 2000,
Approximate Word count = 1616
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page double spaced)