98
3.4. CivicPolitical Participation
In addition to the literature thus far described, there is another substantive body of work that focuses on the processes of young
people’s political socialization, i.e., how young people come to understand and participate in the
political and civic institutions of their society. Unlike the cultural populist accounts described in the earlier sections of this chapter, the term political in this
literature has a specific and non-elastic definition. It is generally used to denote those contesting or supportive interactions with the state and its institutions that
include individual actions as well as those collectively undertaken with fellow community members around matters of shared concern Flannagan Faison,
2001; Roogers et al., 2012. In this section, I will review a sample of studies form this literature in order to draw out the main insights these studies offer into how
young people today practice politics. One of the more prevalent issues in the literature on youth politics concerns
young people ’s disengagement from formal democratic institutions, where
democracy is practiced through the ballot box Edelstein, 2001. For instance, US authors, Liu Kelly 2010 argue that there is a generation gap between past and
present voters, with contemporary young people having a lower voting rate than previous generations. In an effort to explore how to address this gap, Liu Kelly
2010 conducted a service learning study. As part of this study, students from their upper division political sociology class equivalent to 3
rd
year university level course in the UK were required to serve some of their time at a non-profit
community centre, and apply what they were learning in the classroom to real life political situations. Their study coincided with the 2008 US presidential election,
and students were placed in an organization that focused on voter drives. The authors noted that getting young people to be civically engaged in this fashion
proved to be a rather difficult task, as, out of the 35 plus students originally enrolled for the class, only half stayed and agreed to the service-learning
requirement. For the ones that stayed, the authors argue that the process of democratic engagement, as messy and difficult as it is, is facilitated by direct
involvement in the local community. According to Liu Kelly, their students used their technological savvy to spread voter initiatives, and through their use of
technological mediums, gained a lasting sense of civic empowerment. As one student in the study wrote:
99 After my experiences in this course, I have implemented a lot of these
elements into my daily life. I have increased my knowledge in the political process. I have changed my mind set and have become more
open to other beliefs and ideas. I have also encouraged those closest to me, to exercise their civic duties by voting. In addition, I understand
the power in numbers. We as citizens do have the power to make a difference p.12.
Other research focuses on the effects of a political and civics formal and informal education on young people’s political socialization. This body of work
attempts to understand the extent to which educating young people about political and civic issues influences their long-term political beliefs and practices. While
there is no consensus on what amount of civic and political exposure, and at what age, leads to a significant rise in the politicization of young people, at least four
factors are agreed upon. First, the current level of civic and political education offered to Western young people is minimal. Second, even minimal exposure can
lead to young people being politically involved. Third, the longer the exposure the more likely is it that they will form lasting politically active dispositions. And
fourth, political and civics education, both formal and informal, is most effective when the lessons are put into practice, and when young people are treated as active
citizens and allowed a meaningful role in decision making Davies et al., 2005; Torney-Purta et al., 2001; Vromen Collin, 2010; Youniss et al., 2002. For
example, Davie et al., 2005 conducted a project in a local education authority in the north of England aimed at developing a comprehensive civics programme that
would train young people in more participatory forms of democratic action. Among other initiatives, the researchers organized events that involved
“large numbers of young people and adults, provided opportunities for young people to
learn by doing in a structured environment, e.g. class debate, voting on a topical issue, and facilitated opportunities for young people to get involved for real, e.g.
shadow voting at local, General and European Parliament elections ” p, 5. At the
conclusion of their project, Davies et al., 2005 concluded that a formal civics education programme where young people are allowed meaningful and active
input in their civics education can effectively help to train young people to act as
100 responsible citizens within and beyond schools. A similar conclusion is drawn by
Vromen Collin 2010, who, in the Australian context, argue, based on their discussions with youth groups and policy makers concerned with youth political
engagement, that participation and active involvement in civic and political decision making is meaningful for young people when it is youth-led, fun,
informal, and relevant to their everyday experiences. Rogers et al., 2012 argue, in their review and analysis of young peoples as organizers in marginalized
communities across the US, that youth organizing that goes beyond formal politics e.g., voting has the potential to enhance civic learning and development amongst
marginalized young people, and can foster norms that promote the public good in distinctive ways. However, while these studies advocate for
young people’s engagement in participatory forms of democracy, the explicit teaching of theories
and ideas of participatorydirect democracy is not suggested. For example, while the young people in the Davies et al., 2005 and Rogers et al., 2012 accounts
were given outlets to practice direct forms of democracy, there was no mention in these accounts of whether or not young people were exposed to the corresponding
theoretical perspective that could have informed them of how what they were doing is different from the standard form of representative democracy. For
example, Torney-Purta et al., 2001 conduc ted a survey study of students’
knowledge of formal democratic institutions and practices e.g., voting, political parties in twenty-eight countries. The researchers found a consistent correlation
across all countries between the use of democratic practices in the classroom, such as open and respectful discussion of political issues,
and young people’s knowledge of representative forms of democracy, which was, in turn, correlated
with students’ intention to vote. As in all the other accounts discussed in this section, Torney-Putra et al., 2001 take voting and the representative forms of
democracy that they generate and sustain for granted, and neglect to explore the extent of students’ knowledge of other forms of democracy e.g., consensus,
demarchy, direct. The informal participatory practices that these researchers advocate are ultimately more important, and can in theory lead young people to
uncover for themselves how their experiences differ from the standard approaches, as advocated by Liu and Kelly 2010. But as I will discuss in more detail in
Chapter 8, a more direct engagement and education in political-philosophy, and in the broad canon of democratic theory in particular, might help to contribute to that
101 end. However, research on how young people’s knowledge and understanding of
different types of non-liberal democratic political-economic systems and practices contributes to their individual political practices is largely absent. The
empirical component of this thesis will attempt to explore this area. Related to above literature is the existing developmental psychology research
that explores the initial formation, crystilization, and durability of young people’s political attitudes. A minority of studies suggest that political beliefs and attitudes
are fluid and can change with relative frequency throughout a person’s life. However, the bulk of this literature, at least from my initial meta-analysis, argues
that adolescence is the crucial age when young people start to form political dispositions and attitudes that once formed are relatively stable, and will guide
their political orientations throughout their lives Eckstein et al., 2011; Krosnick Alwin, 1991; Loughlin Barling, 2001; Sears Levy, 2003. This is referred to
as the ‘impressionable years hypothesis’ described below by Krosnick Alwin 1988, p. 416:
According to the impressionable years hypothesis, the socializing influences individuals experience when they are young have a
profound impact on their thinking throughout their lives [….]. The historical environment in which a young person becomes an active
participant in the adult world shapes the basic values, attitudes, and world views formed during those years. Once the period of early
socialization has passed, this hypothesis argues, its residuals are fixed within individuals, and these core orientations are unlikely to change.
Finally, a nascent but growing topic in the youth civics and political participation literature focuses on how new media technology is changing the
modes of political participation amongst young people. This literature argues that, contrary to the supposed crisis in democracy whereby Western young people are
presented as largely apathetic, social media sites like Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter are new tools that provide contemporary young people with new means
with which to be politically engaged that differ from the more traditional forms Coleman, 2006; Harris, 2008. For example, Harris 2008 explored young
women’s use of online do it yourself culture, social networking sites, and blogs to
102 open up questions about what counts as politics, and what political practices are
possible for young women at the present moment. In this exploration, Harris 2008 argues that contemporary young women’s use of media-technology
signifies a shift away from conventional civic and political spheres and into a virtual public sphere where young women often position themselves as neoliberal
consumer subjects, but where they can also develop new modes of political activism and subjectivity. As Harris 2008, p. 492 notes, “it is important to
recognise the ways that simply participating in online cultures and networking is a form of developing citizenship skills, regardless of any specific involvement in
political causes”. However, while this nascent literature gives insights into the new modes to which young people are turning to be civically engaged, Morozov 2011
argues, that we should not romanticize the role of the Internet as many young people are still mostl
y using it to watch pornography. In fact, the Internet “makes it harder, not easier to get people to care, if only because the alternatives to
political actions are so much more pleasant and risk free Morozov, 2011. pp. 74- 75”. To be certain, the use of such media, however social it may be, and despite
its potential to be a democratizing agent, is still practiced from the confines of an individual and private space, one that,
as Gibson 2000, p. 262 argues, “continues to pose a serious challenge to the project of building progressive social-democratic
movements, since historical experience indicates that genuinely oppositional practices must at some point connect with alternative social movements to become
politically effective”. Therefore, the political exploration of media use must be linked to actual, by which I mean non-digital, practices. This is something I will
attempt to do in the empirical chapters of this thesis.
3.5 Lessons relevant for this thesis
Kategori