Presentation on theme: "Political socialization 2005-2006 Leiden Uni, Fac Soc Sci, Dep Pol Sci Lecture 3 – 22.02.2006 Start : short recap Lecture 2 (things left) Today’s lecture."— Presentation transcript:
Political socialization Leiden Uni, Fac Soc Sci, Dep Pol Sci Lecture 3 – Start : short recap Lecture 2 (things left) Today’s lecture : trends, generations, new forms Next time : – workshop 1 on Answer to your learning question(s) based on at least 3 sources from the assigned literature list – see course manual – we select papers and install chair/discussant at workshop
Socialization Key emphases : – process – not in vacuum resources previous choices other-dependency – changes with time – as well as place Late-modernity : – more personal flexibility – self-initiated – self-oriented (reflexive) Competing notions : Enculturation Upbringing Maturing Forms : Primary – Secondary Other – Self Intermezzo : Self & (political) identity Phase-thinking
Political socialization Key calls – take account extension youth phase (Niemi & Hepburn) – go beyond phase/stage-thinking (Sears et al.) – focus on reconstruction messages in interactions (Wasburn) – include APC-effects life course transitions (age/life cycle effects) events as catalysts (period effects) formative experiences (cohort/generation effect) – longitudinal (panel) surveys iso postmodernist theorizing
Political socialization Domain-specific hypotheses – effects similar for interactions with parents, teachers, peers, (new) media (incl. does message from parents change when discussed with peers; see Wasburn) ? – effects similar for values, attitudes (incl. cognitions, emotions, etc.), and actions ? – re : actions : effects similar for voting, demonstrating, volunteering, blogging, buycotts, etc. ?
Generations Many labels : e.g., protest generation, lost generation, backseat generation, ‘hotel mama’ generation, etc., vary by nation (similarities are there) Conditions : similar historic location, concious of shared formative history and destiny, groups articulating generation’s voice NL : political cleavages war/pre-war and post-war generation Difficult necessity : disentangling APC-effects (identification problem); impossible in one-shot survey : e.g., say in a survey people aged 20 are more right-wing than people aged 30 and formative period is years of age; why more right-wing ? Because of being 20, events of , or being born in 1986 vis-a-vis being 30, events of , or being born in 1976 ? Nobody will know in a one-shot survey !
Emerging repertoires Survey questions signs of the times: playing cards, occupying buildings, writing letters to Congress (what was conventional- unconventional then, is now no more) Not innocent ! Younger generations seen as non-civic threatening the survival of smooth interactions and democracy based on these surveys Alternative forms of engagement have developed : personalized, identity-based, consumerist, informal, spontaneous, short-lived, flexible, reflexive, feminine (Bennett; Ester & Vinken) Outcomes of political socialization younger generation ? What does this mean for research ? (Stolle & Hooghe) Do new forms matter ? Does shopping make the street lights burn? Do ‘real’ politics increasingly rely on older ‘civic’ generations only?
Emerging repertoires Some examples (see also ‘course info’ on Blackboard) https://secure.adbusters.org/orders/tvbgone/ stone.htm#ukchildrengoonline Contribute to Discussion board forum on Blackboard