e control of wealth simply states that the individuals who have money can avoid certain situations by flaunting their wealth and being involved in making the laws that govern everyone.
The support for the social movement in the form of protesting often occurs when more than one individual feels cheated or unjustly treated. “Protesting is not really a matter of free choice because it is not freely available to all groups all of the time and is not available to lower-class groups in any form” (Piven & Cloward, 1977, 3). In order for a protest to occur, the group of people experiencing the unfair or unjust treatment must believe that a wrong has been done toward them and needs immediate redress (Piven & Cloward, 1977, 12)
Protests by large groups of poor people often occur when the individual’s thought process is altered and the action or reaction to that thought process demands the attention of those people in power. Piven and Cloward (1977) discussed three areas that involve the thought process. The first is the perceived loss of legitimacy of the system. The second is the demand for change to the current routine. Finally, the individual needs to believe that their actions will make a difference in the future (Piven & Cloward, 1977, 4). Voting is considered the appropriate method that allows social change to occur properly, but when groups of people experience deprivation and oppression they begin to question the institutional patterns that direct their daily routine. Once defiance toward the authority associated with the groups daily expectation occurs, a protest is soon to follow (Piven & Cloward, 1977, 21). Authority figures wishing to placate the protest may offer concessions, quiet the disturbance, and try to undermine the sympathy of other community members to quell the situation as quickly and efficiently as possible.
Protesting, in various forms, is the only way poor people can take a stand against injustices and unfair treatment forced