The Political Context of Social Change: A Case Study of Innovation in Adversity in Jerusalem

This case characterizes an attempt by a group of change agents working within the system to rearrange political relationships by developing alternative, nontraditional bases of support in pursuing a social goal. The change agent, employed by a public agency, is faced with the perennial problem of adjusting and adapting what he wants to do with what he can do. The constraints are large ones indeed. Public agencies using public funds are given fairly stringent guidelines for their implementation. Policy is arrived at through a series of political, social, economic, and legal considerations. It is structured so that policy makers can control the implementation of their goals. The activist formulates policy differently. Knowing the specific circumstances and needs of the community he serves, his policy formulations are primarily directed to provide the resources to ameliorate those specific problems. Often the resultant policies conflict with the policy makers both with regard to goals as well as implementation. In such a case the advocate, seeking to work within the system, must find methods to realize his goals by developing alternative bases of support. The Jerusalem case demonstrates some of the ways in which this can be achieved and some of the organizing characteristics necessary to bring it about.

The style of the change group differed fundamentally from the style adopted by those who opposed the innovation. The opposers dealt from an established position of strength. They sought to utilize and maintain a powerful political consensus and to thwart the innovation. The change agents, having little formal authority and less active political support, sought to gain strength by appealing to a moral consensus. Despite the politics, despite coalitions, five disadvantaged youths were being mistreated. Moral issues, as this case illustrates, have a strong influence on the Israeli public. The strategy of the change agents was to demonstrate in a clear-cut manner the effects of an administrative and political decision, to "take those effects to the people," and, in the process, to develop a public force which would overcome the administrative decision-and do something to heal the social ills of a large city.