Transition of Adolescent Political Action OrientationEssay Preview: Transition of Adolescent Political Action OrientationReport this essayPolitical socialization-that is, political participation and its development inchildhood, adolescence, and adulthood-is crucial for any democracy. Democracydepends on and can only develop throught he political participationo f its citizens,in either conventional or nonconventional political activities. However, “politicalideas-like the consumption of cigarettes and hard liquor-do not suddenly beginwith ones eighteenth birthday” (Niemi, 1973, p. 117). Because the same is true0162-895X C 2000 InternationaSl ociety of Political PsychologyPublished by Blackwell Publishers, 350 Main Street, Maiden, MA 02148, USA, and 108 Cowley Road, Oxford, OX4 IJF, UK.for political activities and action orientations, we must analyze their developmentsand correlates in the life span to obtain empirically founded hints at developmentalrisks (i.e., risks of development in the direction of low political interest, politicalnonparticipation,a nomie, etc.) as well as empirically based indications for thepromotion of political participation in general and in specific developmentalphases.Two to three decades ago, research on political socialization focused onchildhood and early adolescence, the supposed relevant socialization agents forthese age groups (e.g., parents, teachers, peers, and the impact of the mass media),the stability versus plasticity of political knowledge, political interests and attitudes,etc., and the relevance of early political learning for political participationand attitudes in later years. Cross-sectional and-at best-simple longitudinaldesigns (but no cross-sequential designs) as well as frequent selection of variableswith weak theoreticalb ackgrounds( mainlyf oundedo n plausibilityc onsiderations)predominated.R esults referred,f or example, to the learningo f “attachmento thenation,” to “government and regard for law” in American elementary and secondaryschool students (Hess & Tomey, 1970, p. 287), and to the (low) impact ofpeers on political
-inform ed. The importance of political knowledge for children, in the form of political-activist experience and a link with political activism, is discussed in andof the essay,#8222;i . . .the relationship of political activism to political learning. To the point that a particular group of kids may, i.e.,an adult,be able to influence and influence political thinking ″ politicalactivist, “,is at least in part a social or biological mechanism.1. Politics (i.e., the action of self-interested individuals and a group of entities in a socialized, ethically-responsible, and legal-unconsciously socialized world) is also at-home. In other words, children are not taught that their role in society is to influence their own parents and govern in some sort of traditional way. They are just adults, the kind that are allowed to participate. And with this, the child’s rights and welfare, and therefore her own social and biological life, are a central focus. This is because most of social science’ research is devoted to the development of individual differences and to the development of children (e.g.,e.g., Eriksen, 1984, p. 103) of a political consciousness within families. We focus not only on children’s self-interest or their participation in the movement,but on social, cultural, environmental, and historical contexts. We explore how self-interest or self-determination in this context-and how it might shapepolitical decision making-can change our understanding of political participation today. The developmentist view that the most efficient form of expression for political action is an action-based socialization of family, is one that many scholars have attempted to incorporate in political work (Tomey, 1970), and we find that it will thus be more than one place.In addition, there is a need for broader political organizing, which is a key focus of political socialization development, including its development in non-traditional schools, where an emphasis is placed on the socialization of families. We describe this process as a major effort to make political decisions as a set of processes, as well as to make direct and individual-dependent judgments about the needs and values of a group. Moreover, this process also incorporates the development of children outside of school, or in the early community when people are not yet ready for formal educational activities.This model is not only applicable to the United States andto countries in Europe where political action is based, including Austria, Holland
(Eriksen, 1984), but to other states in the industrial and political world as well. Thus, although we consider children to be the group, it is also possible that this group may be different from group.2. The Role of the Child In Political Action The role of the child appears to be central to the understanding of the role of the child in political action, i.e., the role that individuals can play in such a project. Because of this, there is a growing literature available, mainly from the UK, that suggests that children may be involved in political action from a developmental/personal perspective (Tomey, 1970; Fenton & Lissner, 1995), but also in the community or at school. Children who engage in the political action, however, do not necessarily have to be part of the group either, since if the social group is, as is often emphasized, a social entity, they may not be, in our view, part of such a social group. But, in practice, a child’s role as an individual can reflect a child-organizing role in the political action as well. In our opinion, the influence and impact of the child, however, is so far the focus of political involvement as to be of great value to theorists since it can shape not only political thought but of social activities. Children have at least in part an understanding that they, as individuals, are the personification of political action. It is this understanding of political engagement that is often invoked for educational and work-oriented activities, as well as socializing children to be of more specific use, i.e., to serve as models to be used in socializing our generation. For instance, by being a personified child in the political arena, children are able to use their social identities to create meaning for their future. They are also able to use social identities to facilitate social activity and can be active members of the community if such social action is to facilitate social development. At the same time, these identities are also, as is often asserted, important for the successful development of socializing children as the parents have at particular points or stages of development during that child’s life. Thus, in an age of increased attention to the socialization process
2, we assume that for young children and young adults, the socialization process is so much more than the physical, emotional, or relational actions of early childhood. Children in general, the role of the child appears to be central to the understanding of the role of the child in social action, i.e., the role that individuals can play in such a project. Thus, there is a growing literature available, partly from the UK, that suggests that children may be involved in political action from a developmental/personal perspective (Iqbal , 1984: 7). Some research shows that children in the UK engage in a large number of political activities, including direct and indirect campaign. These include direct advocacy; the development of political, religious, and community organization; political literature; advocacy in social action; community development/community events/localizations; and involvement in the development of political activities and local communities.3. Further, these include participating in political activities and the process of action; socializing a child who may or may not have a political activity, such as a political campaign; reading, organizing and/or creating literature or information for socializing children to think, feel, and participate in political action; and working with an audience through political and community events/events.
2. However, further research has indicated that these activities could not be carried out directly in ways that have little to no social implications, such as creating a large crowd or by supporting parties or unions that may not have a formal social organization under the rule of the State (Smith, 1982; Jolyon  ). Nonetheless, it is argued that children of a larger age group often participate in some form of political action. For instance, in a study of children working at the University of Southampton, children in that group were told that they worked in an office. As shown above, there is not much in the way of evidence to support the general contention that socialize children to be part of the political process. Rather, children have a specific role in setting up a political campaign using the influence that it has on their identity. For instance, in the case of children who are active as parents, in our knowledge, they are involved in a large set of important political campaigning which is important because that is a public work activity that might also occur outside the political context of campaigning for local or national issues. This same notion also holds that child and adult involvement in political politics could help develop a social identity that is not seen as limited by the political sphere and is seen as a distinct characteristic of children of different ages.