[_delirium]

Sometimes more than others. The civil rights movement largely dissolved after achieving most of its demands, for example. Many of the individual participants continued to campaign for additional causes, but the movement didn't continue with anything near its prior strength once the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act were passed, because they couldn't hold together the broad coalition around a new series of demands.

[wh-uws]

I have to take issue with this statement. It didn't just "dissolve" bad things happened (what happened the Martin King and Malcolm X is well known but also look into the fate of the Black Panthers) to all of the leaders and the movement floundered without its stronger figure heads.

That's what is so vitally important about the amorphous collective form of Anonymous and even later Occupy Wall Street. Without a clear head to cut off or discredit the movement can continue with its goals even if it loses a few people.

[_delirium]

I think that's part of it, but I do think satisfying some of the major demands dissolved the broad coalition; moderate liberals, especially white liberals, were largely satisfied by the civil-rights legislation, and dropped out of the movement, leaving a much smaller activist core. The SNCC took a huge nosedive in membership after 1965, for example, and even MLK found it harder to muster the same levels of support for his post-'65 causes (like desegregating Chicago, and ending poverty).