Abstract
In my contribution, I focus on the blurred boundary between activism and institutionalized politics. Drawing on Michele Lamont's concept of symbolic boundaries, I tackle the question how activists relate themselves to the realm of politics.
Through an analysis of interviews with Czech activists, I have recognized two ideal types of activism (which likened Buechler's typology of social movements teories). The first one is political activism, which is based on a broad definition of politics.
I will show that within this category, activists lay symbolic boundaries which are based on ideological and thematic notions. They thematise politicians as allies or rivals according to the current strategies, so their boundary work is rather instrumental and they are willing to cross the boundary into politics, if it is needed.
The second kind of activism, cultural activism, is based on identity politics, which is distinctly different from institutional politics. Unlike the political activists, these activists lay bright boundaries with politics, in order to distinguish themselves from instrumental acting and construct their own independent identity as activists.
I argue that the relationship of activists to politics can be used as an indicator of their conception of activism, including their repertoires of action.