Highlighting the compatability between movements is key—the permutation makes it more likely that people join up with their struggle.
Heaney and Rojas-prof organizational studies and sociology, Indiana-12 (Antiwar Politics and Paths of Activist Participation on the Left, http://www.indiana.edu/~workshop/papers/rojas_working%20paper.pdf)
These studies suggest that scholars should more systematically examine how individual activists navigate a social world where activists may move among policy domains. Entry into activism through one movement gives an individual access to a larger array of allied movements. It is natural to then ask about the factors that encourage activists toswitch or combine issues and the outcomes associated with particular activism trajectories. The rest of this paper examines activism trajectories, which we define as the temporal sequence of participation in one or more movements. That is, an "activist trajectory" is a list of the movements that someone has joined over time. Some trajectories may be simple; an activist may prefer to participate in immigration rallies and nothing else. Other trajectories may be highly complex. An activist may have begun their political career by joining a civil rights movement march in the 1960s, then joined a women's group in the early 1970s. Later, the activist may have moved away from civil rights altogether and joined an immigration rights organization in the 1980s. Multiple studies of activist biographies (Jasper 1999; Carroll and Ratner 1996; Heaney and Rojas 2010) show that a substantial group of people migrate among movements or simultaneously participate in multiple movements. We consider two questions about activist trajectories. First, how does initial mobilization affect a subsequent activism trajectory? In other words, does it matter how an activist got involved in politics? Entry into activism may affect a subsequent trajectory through numerous mechanisms. The recruiting movement may have a relatively central position in the wider social movement field. Some movements may have many connections to other movements. For example, historical and sociological accounts of the civil rights movement have documented its many overlaps with the women’s rights movement, the Vietnam War movement, and others (e.g., Minkoff 1997) . In contrast, some movements may have a more circumscribed role. Bearman and Everett’s (1993) study of Washington, DC organizations also showed that some movements occupied more peripheral positions in activist networks. Thus, entry through more central movements would be associated with trajectories where activists associate with many different movements.