The French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu argued that the presence of critical counter-voices and powers is a fundamental element of any genuine democracy. However, in Australia, these counter-voices are increasingly marginalized and threatened by controversial laws that would limit the legal standing of conservation groups and the use of overseas donations for advocacy purposes based on the argument that ‘systematic, well-funded’ environmental campaigns are threatening the nation’s economic prosperity. Drawing on social movement theory and Bourdieu’s theory of practice, this case study details the final months of the Save Beeliar Wetlands (SBW) campaign in the lead up to the 2017 West Australian state election. The author challenges three common assumptions in the extant PR activism literature: The existence of activists in opposition to organizations and governments, the presence of a ‘zone of compromise’ between activists and the organizations or governments whose actions they are opposing, and the conceptualization of activists as homogeneous entity. Evolving into a colorful collective of over 35 local groups, five local councils, and thousands of individuals, Beeliar Wetland Defenders (BWD) successfully created an alternative narrative to the State and Federal Governments’ neoliberal agenda. Activists thereby contributed significantly to a change in leadership and the termination of a $1.9 billion infrastructure project. This article argues that activist groups’ interventions in public debate perform a valuable societal voice as critical counter-voices in challenging established hierarchies and power relationships. However, in mounting and framing their arguments within the neoliberal framework, activist groups may also inadvertently reinforce this worldview.

中文翻译：

---

“ PRi特别版：公共关系与新自由主义之间的交汇处” –无路可走：重新审视维权人士在公民社会中的作用

法国社会学家皮埃尔·布迪厄（Pierre Bourdieu）认为，重要的反声音和权力的存在是任何真正民主的基本要素。但是，在澳大利亚，这些有争议的法律越来越被边缘化，并受到有争议的法律的威胁，这些法律将限制保护组织的合法地位，并基于“系统的，资金充足的”环保运动被认为是倡导目的而使用海外捐赠进行宣传。威胁国家的经济繁荣。该案例研究借鉴了社会运动理论和布迪厄的实践理论，详细介绍了拯救蜂巢湿地运动（SBW）的最后几个月，直到2017年西澳大利亚州大选。作者对现存的公关活动主义文献中的三个常见假设提出了挑战：反对组织和政府的激进主义者的存在，激进主义者与其反对的组织或政府之间存在“妥协区”，以及将激进主义者概念化为同质实体。Beeliar湿地捍卫者（BWD）发展成为一个由35个以上的地方团体，五个地方委员会和成千上万的个人组成的丰富多彩的集体，成功地为州和联邦政府的新自由主义议程创造了另一种叙述方式。因此，激进主义者为改变领导地位和终止一项耗资19亿美元的基础设施项目做出了重大贡献。本文认为，激进主义者团体在公共辩论中的干预表现出宝贵的社会声音，作为挑战既定的等级制度和权力关系的重要反言。然而，