I added the phrase "totally and completely" at the end to emphasize that I'm looking for a movement which accomplished none of its major goals and, preferably, would not see widespread support if it resurfaced today. It doesn't necessarily need to have had some spectacular implosion in order to qualify.
I often see the assertion during Civil Rights debates where Side A will accuse Side B of being on the wrong side of history. Almost always, this is the pro-whatevers saying this to the anti-whatever, and for the most part my knowledge of US history supports that trend. Once a movement becomes widespread and well known, it seems to inevitably effect lasting change. We still have racism and sexism and homophobia, certainly, but it looks to me like we're always moving in the "right" (I accept this is technically a matter of opinion) direction, with civil liberties ultimately being expanded.
Then I was thinking about the anti-vaxx movement (I know this violates the 20-year rule, and don't want to ask questions about it specifically, but I only have this contemporary example to help explain my point). Arguably, this is a civil rights issue relating to religious freedom and parental sovereignty which has gotten massive amounts of support and media coverage and spread far beyond just the US. Whether or not they will be ultimately successful only time will tell, but the current trajectory looks grim for them and it made me very curious if there have been movements that had a similar amount of momentum behind them but eventually collapsed.
Thank you in advance!
Well, there's the modern pederasty movement. By pederasty I mean movements defending adult - adolescent sexual relationships, especially of the homosexual kind. It arose during the 60s and 70s, along with other parts of the sexual revolution and civil rights movement. NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association) was founded in 1978 and describes itself as a political, educational and civil rights association whose goal is to end "the extreme oppression of men and boys in mutually consensual relationships". So they (the few members) describe themselves as being part of civil rights, but I don't know how much other civil rights would agree with that (I think not much, at least from what the statements I've read of gay civil rights associations, that try to dissociate their image as much as possible from them).
You might argue that the welfare rights movement of the 1960's-70's (which tried to expand to more of a poor people's movement but never quite made it) is an example of a failed social movement. They did get some changes in terms of reducing racism in determining benefit eligibility, but by 1980 Reagan's anti-government rhetoric and the (false) image of the welfare queen became firmly lodged in people's minds. After that we entered into a long period of cutting and reducing social spending of all kinds and reducing taxes. Still today it is hard to argue for government support of almost any social program in the US.