Political Sociology Course Outline PDF

Saa 323 323 POLITICAL SOCIOLOGY COURSE OUTLINE Introduction. Nature of man and political be behavior concept of power and politics Sources of power Authority , type of authority Approaches to the study of politics and society Concept of perception In society/sociology Political sociology and the notion of social order. Why do peopre obey? Theories of social arder. Political culture : Political socialization. Political participation (extent of involvement): Introduction Political sociology is a complex field that sits at the intersection of political science and sociology, posing challenges in defining its scope and methods due to differing perspectives in these disciplines. Despite this ambiguity, establishing a definitional framework is essential for understanding its nature and scope. At its core, political sociology seeks to explore the societal factors influencing political behavior and thoughts. It delves into the dynamics of power acquisition, utilization, and maintenance within society, while also examining how power structures can be altered. According to Nwabuzor and Mueller (1987), political sociology analyzes not only how individuals engage in political activities but also the underlying societal influences shaping these actions. Dowse and Hughes (1983) further define political sociology as the study of the interaction between politics and society. This involves examining how political systems interact with social structures, norms, and institutions, and how these interactions shape political outcomes. According to Dowse and Hughes (1983), one of the primary difficulties in defining political sociology arises from its ambiguous status as a field situated between two contentious disciplines: political science and sociology. These disciplines lack clear-cut agreement on the scope and methods of political sociology, leading to challenges in defining its boundaries and principles. Furthermore, Dowse and Hughes (1983) note that there is disagreement within both political science and sociology regarding the concept of politics or the political. This disagreement further complicates the definition of political sociology, as different perspectives within these disciplines influence how scholars approach the study of politics within society. Political sociology explores how individuals' political socialization, shaped by their social experiences, influences their perceptions, attitudes, and behavior towards political institutions. It covers various aspects of human relationships involving power dynamics, spanning from family and group dynamics to broader societal interactions. According to Otite and Ogionwo, political sociology examines the interaction between politics and society, considering the impact of social factors such as kinship, religion, land, economy, and values on political dynamics, and vice versa. While some scholars argue that there is no significant theoretical difference between political sociology and political science, others, like Bottomore, point out distinctions in their traditional focuses. Political science tends to emphasize government machinery and operations, often detached from social contexts, whereas political sociology delves into broader social contexts of politics. Some political scientists advocate for a narrow focus on state operations to maintain analytical guidelines, as argued by Bendix. However, this perspective overlooks the broader social context of political relations, as highlighted by scholars like Crick, who emphasize the importance of considering politics beyond state operations to understand its full implications in society. Overall, political sociology provides valuable insights into the intricate relationship between politics and society, shedding light on the underlying dynamics that drive political behavior and shape the distribution and exercise of power within societies. THE NATURE O F MAN AND POLITICAL BEHAVIOUR Man as a Political Animal: According to Hobbes, humans are inherently political creatures, driven by a perpetual desire for power that only ceases with death. This intrinsic political nature is expressed through political behavior. Political Behavior in a Social Context: Political behavior is not a private matter but is expressed and understood within a social context. It involves interactions between individuals or groups, where power dynamics play a crucial role in influencing outcomes. Desire for Power and Control: Humans exhibit political instincts through a desire to seek power and authority to control various societal processes. This desire for control extends from the smallest interpersonal interactions to society as a whole, despite the complexities involved. Interplay between Human Needs and Political Behavior: Human needs, both physiological and social, influence political attitudes and behavior. The satisfaction or non- satisfaction of these needs can shape patterns of political behavior, which vary among individuals and groups based on their orientations and circumstances. Political Context in Human Activities: Politics is intertwined with various aspects of human life, including economic, religious, and social activities. Concepts like economic power and religious power demonstrate the political dimension present in all human endeavors. Fundamental Concepts in Political Sociology: Political sociology revolves around the concepts of power and politics, which are essential for understanding the relationship between social and political systems. These concepts are intertwined and lead to a deeper understanding of political sociology. Explanation: Humans are inherently political beings, driven by a natural instinct for power and control. This instinct is expressed through political behavior, which occurs within a social context where interactions and power dynamics shape outcomes. Moreover, human needs play a significant role in influencing political attitudes and behavior, as the satisfaction or non-satisfaction of these needs can lead to different patterns of political engagement. Furthermore, politics permeates all aspects of human life, including economic, religious, and social activities. This recognition expands the scope of political sociology, which focuses on understanding the relationship between social structures and political systems through the concepts of power and politics. These concepts are fundamental to analyzing how individuals and groups navigate and interact within society, ultimately shaping political outcomes and dynamics. Power Man's Pursuit of Power: Humans seek to acquire power and utilize it to their advantage across various avenues of human endeavor. Power is considered a nebulous phenomenon that transcends specific locations or activities. Scope of Political Sociology: Political sociology is interested in power in its broad scope of application. Even in simple or pre-industrial societies, the network of power relations explains the nexus of relationships between individuals. Sources and Forms of Power: Scholars emphasize different sources and forms of power, including wealth, force, authority, influence, control, and coercion. Power can serve individual, community, political, or economic ends. Challenge of Defining Power: Defining power is challenging due to divergent ideological orientations among scholars. There is no universally acceptable definition, but it generally involves the ability of individuals or groups to pursue their interests, even in the face of resistance. Components of Power: Power involves ability, interaction, and the pursuit of interests. It requires energy, which enables actors to exercise their will over others, often driven by perceived benefits or interests. Pervasiveness of Power: Power is pervasive in social relationships, expressed within various institutions like families, religious associations, universities, and trade unions. It is a sociological concept, according to Barry and Lasswell, involving interpersonal situations and reciprocal relationships between rulers and subjects. Explanation: Humans relentlessly pursue power across different spheres of life, shaping the dynamics of social relationships. Power, though difficult to define universally, is recognized as a pervasive force that influences interactions at individual and group levels. Political sociology delves into the broad scope of power dynamics, analyzing how they manifest in various societal structures and institutions. Different scholars emphasize diverse sources and forms of power, reflecting the complexity of human interactions. Despite the challenges in defining power, certain aspects remain clear: power involves the ability to pursue interests, often through interactions that may involve coercion or authority. It is evident in social relationships, where individuals or groups assert their influence to achieve desired outcomes. Overall, the nature of power is multifaceted and its significance in understanding social dynamics, emphasizing its role in shaping human behavior and relationships across different contexts. Sources of power Wealth Economic Power and Influence: Economic power, particularly in the Marxian perspective, is seen as determining relations in all other aspects of human endeavor. Individuals who control wealth can influence and control the behavior of others, especially those who rely on them for their livelihoods. Patron-Clientelism: The relationship between those who control wealth and those who depend on them is often described as patron-clientelism. Wealthy individuals, or patrons, wield power over their clients, influencing their behavior and actions. Impact on Political System: Economic power significantly influences the political system, particularly in terms of political participation. Success in politics often requires financial resources, leading candidates to rely on wealthy backers or "political godfathers" who provide funding and support in exchange for influence. Influence of Wealthy Backers: Major financiers of political office holders, whether individuals or corporate entities, wield significant power as they influence government policies and actions from behind the scenes. They often hold sway in government decision- making processes and boardrooms. Influence on Voters: In societies with high levels of poverty, voters can be easily swayed by displays of wealth by candidates, regardless of their popularity or character. The perception of wealth can impact voter decisions, leading to the influence of economically powerful individuals in the political arena. Explanation: Economic power has significant influence of on various aspects of society, particularly in the political realm. Wealthy individuals hold sway over political processes by providing financial support to candidates, who in turn rely on them for resources and backing. The relationship between economic power and political influence is described as patron-clientelism, where patrons control and influence the actions of their clients. In Nigeria, this dynamic is particularly pronounced, with wealthy backers playing a pivotal role in political success and governance. Moreover, economic disparities impact voter behavior. In societies with high levels of poverty, voters may be easily influenced by displays of wealth, regardless of the character or popularity of the candidates. This further solidifies the influence of economically powerful individuals in shaping political outcomes. Force Force as a Source of Power: Force is the direct or threatened use of coercion to impose one's will on others. It is a commonly recognized source of power and can produce immediate effects. Manifestations of Force: Force can manifest in various levels of human relationships. It may occur between individuals, where physical strength is used to impose one's will on the weaker party. Within families, parents may use force to compel their children to perform certain tasks. Governments, whether civil or military, may employ force or coercive measures to achieve specific objectives. Examples of Force in Governance: Governments may use force to maintain obedience and suppress dissent. In the case of General Abacha's regime in Nigeria, dissenters were incarcerated, and opposition members were reminded of the state's readiness to use coercive apparatus to maintain control. Universality of Force in Governance: The use of force to ensure obedience is a universal phenomenon, irrespective of the political system in operation. Even in democracies, there may be instances where force is deemed necessary, although the degree and frequency of its use vary depending on the level of democratic maturity. Examples of Force in Democracy: In advanced democracies, force may be employed as a last resort to prevent societal disintegration or upheaval. However, in transitional or experimental democracies, rulers may resort to force to maintain power or quell dissent, as seen in the example of the Odi massacre during President Obasanjo's tenure in Nigeria. Explanation: Force is described as a direct or threatened use of coercion to impose one's will on others, often resulting in immediate effects. It is evident across various human relationships, from individual interactions to governmental actions. Governments frequently employ force to maintain control and obedience, regardless of the political system in place. Examples such as General Abacha's regime in Nigeria demonstrate how force can be used to suppress dissent and maintain power. The use of force is not limited to authoritarian regimes but can also be observed in democracies, albeit to varying extents. In advanced democracies, force may be used sparingly and as a last resort to preserve societal stability. However, in transitional or experimental democracies, rulers may resort to force more readily to assert authority and quash opposition, potentially leading to human rights abuses and societal unrest. Authority Definition of Authority: Authority is institutionalized power recognized by the people over whom it is exercised. It refers to the control an individual or institution has over a group of people, where obedience is based on the legitimacy of the position rather than the individual's personal qualities. Legitimacy and Obedience: When individuals or a collective agree, either explicitly or implicitly, to surrender their rights to a political unit and abide by its rules, they are recognizing the authority of that unit. This recognition is often based on a social contract, where individuals consent to be governed and follow the directives of those in authority. Family Setting: In patriarchal family structures, the father typically holds a position of leadership as the head of the household. His authority is accepted by other family members based on his role as the breadwinner and the one who established the family. This authority allows him to exercise control over household affairs and decisions. Acceptance of Authority: Authority is prevalent in various aspects of human collectivity, where individuals or groups accept the leadership and directives of those in positions of authority. This acceptance is often rooted in cultural norms, social hierarchies, or institutional structures. Explanation: Authority is described as institutionalized power that is recognized by the people over whom it is exercised. It involves the control exerted by individuals or institutions over a group of people, with obedience stemming from the legitimacy of the position rather than personal qualities. The concept of authority is closely tied to the idea of legitimacy and consent. When individuals agree to be governed by a political unit and abide by its rules, they are acknowledging the authority of that unit based on a social contract. In family settings, particularly in patriarchal structures, the father often holds authority as the head of the household. His leadership role is accepted by other family members, allowing him to make decisions and exert control over household matters. Overall, authority is a fundamental aspect of human collectivity, where individuals or groups consent to be governed and follow the directives of those in positions of authority, whether in familial, societal, or institutional contexts. Max Weber identified three ideal types of authority: Legal-Rational Authority: This type of authority is based on rationally established laws and regulations. The leader's legitimacy comes from their adherence to these laws and their role expectations within the organization or society. Individuals obey the leader because they accept both the laws and the leader's role. Traditional Authority: This authority is based on traditional prescriptions passed down through generations. The legitimacy of the leader rests on the acceptance and adherence to these traditions by group members, rather than the leader's ability to lead. Administrative staff under traditional authority are often personally dependent on the ruler. Charismatic Authority: This authority is held by an individual with unique qualities that inspire devotion and obedience from followers. Charismatic leaders possess special qualities, such as holiness, heroism, or exemplariness, which set them apart. Their charisma may stem from qualities like credibility, humility, or oratory skills, and it enables them to command respect and loyalty. Explanation: Max Weber's typology of authority provides a framework for understanding different forms of legitimate domination or power. Legal-rational authority is grounded in the rational application of laws and regulations, where leaders derive legitimacy from their adherence to these rules. Individuals obey because they accept the legality and rationality of the leader's actions. Traditional authority, on the other hand, is based on long-standing traditions and customs. The legitimacy of the leader comes from the acceptance of these traditions by group members, rather than their ability to lead effectively. Administrative staff under traditional authority are typically loyal to the ruler due to personal dependencies and piety. Charismatic authority stems from the unique qualities of an individual leader, such as charisma, credibility, or oratory skills. Charismatic leaders inspire devotion and obedience from followers who are drawn to their exceptional qualities. Charisma can be cultivated through positive extraordinariness, humility, and compelling personal attributes, enabling leaders to command respect and loyalty from their followers. Politics Definition of Politics: Politics is the struggle for power and the practical application of power. It encompasses the acquisition and utilization of power in social relationships. Politics involves the management of social interactions and the exercise of power and authority between individuals or groups. Interplay of Conflict and Power: Politics involves conflict between different societal groups, particularly between the wealthy seeking to maximize power and the less privileged seeking to minimize their power. It is pervasive in human society due to the inherent struggle for scarce resources and the desire to control them. Motivations in Politics: Individuals engage in politics to acquire benefits or rewards, both ego-centric and communal-centric. Actions are motivated by the perceived benefits they offer, whether explicit or implicit. These benefits drive individuals to compete for resources and influence within social structures. Examples of Political Actions: Politics is not limited to individual actions but also involves collective actions by groups or organizations. Examples include unions going on strike to protest unfair treatment, student groups boycotting exams to demand better conditions, and government officials bribing legislators to pass favorable legislation. Influence and Interaction: Politics extends beyond individual actions to encompass interactions within collectives. Individuals influence each other's actions and behavior, seeking to achieve specific goals or ends through persuasion, coercion, or negotiation. Explanation: Politics is described as the struggle for power and the practical application of power within social relationships. It involves the management of interactions between individuals or groups, where power is sought, acquired, and utilized to achieve specific objectives. The interplay of conflict and power is a central aspect of politics, with different societal groups vying for control and influence. This struggle for power is pervasive in human society due to the competition for scarce resources and the desire to maximize one's position within social structures. Motivations in politics stem from the perceived benefits or rewards associated with certain actions. Individuals engage in political activities to acquire these benefits, whether they are personal or communal in nature. These motivations drive individuals to compete for resources and influence within society. Politics encompasses both individual and collective actions, with groups or organizations mobilizing to achieve common goals. Examples include strikes, boycotts, and lobbying efforts aimed at influencing decision-making processes and shaping policies. Ultimately, politics involves complex interactions and negotiations between individuals and groups, where power dynamics play a significant role in determining outcomes. It is a fundamental aspect of human social life, characterized by the pursuit of interests and the exercise of influence within various social contexts. Approaches Structural functional approach Structural-Functional Approach: This approach views society and politics as interrelated systems of institutions, where no part can be understood in isolation. Society influences politics, and vice versa, shaping each other's nature and functioning. Interconnectedness of Society and Politics: According to this approach, societal values, norms, and expectations influence political culture, while politics also impacts the nature of society. Changes in one aspect of the social system lead to reactions and adjustments in other parts of the system, aiming to restore equilibrium. Response to Change: Scholars like Parsons argue that changes in societal values or orientations trigger reactions across the social system, including politics, in an effort to maintain social order and equilibrium. For example, colonialism altered existing value orientations, leading to changes in political values and attitudes. Focus on Social Order: Structural-functionalists are primarily concerned with maintaining social order in human society. They analyze how power can be employed to achieve social order, given the historical events and circumstances that led to the emergence of sociology and political sociology. Functionality of Politics: The structural-functional approach examines how politics contributes to societal functioning by generating social order for the continued survival of society. The concept of function refers to the contribution of politics to society's functional prerequisites, emphasizing the importance of maintaining order to ensure societal stability and productivity. Explanation: The structural-functional approach emphasizes the interconnectedness of society and politics, viewing them as interrelated systems where changes in one part lead to adjustments in other parts. Society influences politics through its values and norms, while politics shapes the nature of society. This approach highlights the importance of maintaining social order to ensure societal stability and productivity. In response to changes in societal values or orientations, political systems adapt to restore equilibrium and uphold social order. For example, colonialism led to shifts in political values and attitudes, prompting adjustments across the social system to accommodate these changes. Overall, the structural-functional approach focuses on the functionality of politics in maintaining social order and stability within society. By analyzing how politics contributes to societal functioning, scholars aim to understand the dynamics of power and governance in ensuring the continued survival of society. Empirical approach Definition of Empirical Approach: The empirical approach to political sociology focuses on examining the causal connections and associations between society and politics. It emphasizes studying observable phenomena and conducting fieldwork to understand political events and their effects on society. Foundation in Empiricism: Empiricism, derived from the Greek word "empeiria" meaning "experience," forms the epistemological foundation of the empirical approach. Empiricists believe that legitimate knowledge is acquired through sensory experience and observation. Historical Influences: Influential empiricists like John Locke and Aristotle emphasized the importance of observation and experience in acquiring knowledge. Locke proposed that the mind is initially blank at birth and learns through experiences in the social environment, while Aristotle focused on causal relationships between observable events. Durkheim's Contributions: Émile Durkheim, considered a founding figure in sociology, further developed empirical ideas by emphasizing the study of social facts and concomitant variation. He argued for investigating phenomena with common external characteristics and proposed the principle of concomitant variation to understand causal relationships. Approach in Political Sociology: Political sociologists following the empirical approach conduct investigative or fieldwork examinations of political phenomena. They focus on observable causal relationships between political events, such as the relationship between political socialization and participation, political culture and behavior, and societal factors influencing voting behavior. Explanation: The empirical approach in political sociology emphasizes studying the observable connections between society and politics. It draws on the principles of empiricism, which prioritize sensory experience and observation in acquiring knowledge. Historically, influential empiricists like John Locke and Aristotle emphasized the importance of observation and experience in understanding the world. Locke proposed that the mind learns through experiences in the social environment, while Aristotle focused on causal relationships between observable events. Émile Durkheim further developed empirical ideas in sociology, emphasizing the study of social facts and proposing the principle of concomitant variation. He argued for investigating phenomena with common external characteristics and understanding causal relationships through observable changes. In political sociology, the empirical approach involves conducting fieldwork and examining observable causal relationships between political events and societal factors. Researchers focus on phenomena like political socialization, participation, and voting behavior, analyzing how societal influences impact political outcomes. By studying these observable connections, political sociologists gain insights into the complex interplay between society and politics. Historical conflict approach Definition of Historical-Conflict Approach: This approach to political sociology examines society and politics through the lens of historic struggles among groups and institutions for power over an extended period. It emphasizes the conflict nature of power relations and is exemplified by Karl Marx's theory of class struggle. Marx's Theory of Class Struggle: Marx posited that the history of all societies is marked by class struggle between different social groups, such as slave owners and slaves, landlords and serfs, and capitalists and the proletariat. He believed that the class struggle evolves over time, with the nature of contention changing according to historical conditions. Political Nature of Class Struggle: Marx argued that for a class to be effective in the struggle for power, it must assume a political character and develop collective consciousness among its members. He asserted that every class struggle is inherently political and that society can only progress through conflict rather than order. Structural Basis of Conflict: Marx attributed the potential for class conflict to the internal structure of society, particularly its division into classes with differing interests, values, and orientations. He argued that the ruling class dominates not only the material forces of society but also its intellectual and cultural aspects, shaping dominant ideas and values. Role of Marxist Scholars: Marx's views on class struggle and societal conflict have become foundational for Marxist scholars analyzing inter-group relations politically. They evaluate societal dynamics based on the power struggles between different social classes and the ways in which dominant classes maintain their control over society. Explanation: The historical-conflict approach in political sociology, exemplified by Karl Marx's theory of class struggle, focuses on analyzing society and politics through the lens of historic struggles among social groups for power. Marx argued that throughout history, societies have been characterized by conflicts between different classes, such as slave owners and slaves, landlords and serfs, and capitalists and the proletariat. According to Marx, the nature of class struggle evolves over time, with the contenders in the battle changing according to historical conditions. He emphasized the political nature of class struggle, asserting that effective classes must develop collective consciousness and engage in political action to challenge the dominant ruling class. Marx attributed the potential for conflict to the internal structure of society, particularly its division into classes with differing interests and values. He argued that the ruling class not only dominates the material forces of society but also shapes its intellectual and cultural aspects, influencing dominant ideas and values. Marxist scholars analyze inter-group relations politically based on Marx's theories, evaluating societal dynamics in terms of power struggles between different social classes and the mechanisms by which dominant classes maintain their control over society. Marx's views on class struggle remain influential in understanding the historical and ongoing conflicts within societies. Origin of political sociology Origins of Political Sociology: The emergence of sociology as an academic discipline was influenced by the socio-cultural changes of the 18th and 19th centuries in Europe, particularly the industrial revolution and the French revolution. These events created conditions for critical assessment of social order and chaos, leading to the birth of sociology as part of intellectual reactions to societal tumult. Concerns of Early Sociologists: Early sociologists, such as Henri Saint-Simon and Auguste Comte, were concerned with restoring social order in the face of societal disruptions caused by revolutions. They viewed society as an organic unity, where disturbances in one part could lead to chaos in the whole. Comte, often regarded as the founder of sociology, sought to establish sociology as a positive science that could analyze and explain the laws of human society. Impact of Revolutions on Political Thought: The French revolution, despite its failure, greatly influenced modern political thought by challenging traditional authority and advocating for popular acceptance of political authority based on rule of law. It led to constitutional reforms aimed at guaranteeing fundamental human rights and limiting the absolute power of the monarchy. Transition to Modern Political Science: The period following the revolutions witnessed the establishment of modern political science, characterized by a distinction between the political and social realms. Political sociology emerged, focusing on the relationship between politics and society, including the emergence of democracy and social classes in industrial societies. Shift to Behaviouralism: The nature of political inquiry shifted from metaphysics to behaviouralism, emphasizing objective analysis of political behaviour. Political behaviouralism, synonymous with political sociology, explores how social and cultural factors influence political behaviour and power dynamics within human relationships. Innate Political Nature of Man: Interest in politics has existed since civilization began, reflecting humanity's capacity for both good and evil. Political sociology seeks to understand and explain how individuals employ power in pursuit of their interests within society. Explanation: The origins of political sociology can be traced back to the socio-cultural changes of the 18th and 19th centuries in Europe, particularly the industrial revolution and the French revolution. These events created conditions for critical assessment of social order and chaos, leading to the birth of sociology as an academic discipline. Early sociologists, such as Henri Saint-Simon and Auguste Comte, were concerned with restoring social order in the face of disruptions caused by revolutions. They viewed society as an organic unity, where disturbances in one part could lead to chaos in the whole. Comte sought to establish sociology as a positive science capable of analyzing and explaining the laws of human society. The French revolution challenged traditional authority and advocated for popular acceptance of political authority based on rule of law. It led to constitutional reforms aimed at guaranteeing fundamental human rights and limiting the absolute power of the monarchy. These events influenced the emergence of modern political science, characterized by a distinction between the political and social realms. Political sociology, a product of this period, focuses on the relationship between politics and society, including the emergence of democracy and social classes in industrial societies. The shift from metaphysics to behaviouralism emphasized objective analysis of political behaviour, exploring how social and cultural factors influence power dynamics within human relationships. Overall, political sociology seeks to understand how individuals employ power in pursuit of their interests within society, reflecting humanity's capacity for both good and evil in the political realm. Theories of social order Importance of Social Order: Social order is essential for the stability and functioning of human societies. The application of power and politics can either contribute to social order or lead to social disorder. Political sociologists are interested in understanding how power can be positively used to achieve stability and consensus in social groups and societies. Criticism of Political Sociology: Some political economists argue that political sociology focuses too much on concepts like agreement, consensus, and cooperation, neglecting the role of conflicts in social groups. However, political sociology has a broad scope of analysis and examines various relationships between society and politics, including conflict. Versatility of Political Sociology: Political sociology is versatile and open-minded, exploring all kinds of relationships between society and politics. It is not limited to analyzing the relationship between economic institutions and political structures or conflicts. The preoccupation of political sociology with social order is understandable given its historical context, influenced by the events of the two great revolutions in Europe. Theories of Social Order: Dowse and Hughes provide a comprehensive discussion of the nature and types of theories explaining the concept of social order. These theories help us understand how order is established and maintained in human collectivities. Explanation: Social order is crucial for the stability and functioning of human societies. Political sociologists are interested in understanding how power and politics can contribute to achieving stability and consensus within social groups and societies, thereby averting social disorder. Critics of political sociology argue that it focuses too much on concepts like agreement, consensus, and cooperation, overlooking the role of conflicts in social groups. However, political sociology has a broad scope of analysis and examines various relationships between society and politics, including conflict. It is versatile and open-minded, exploring all kinds of relationships between society and politics. The preoccupation of political sociology with social order is understandable given its historical context, influenced by the events of the two great revolutions in Europe. Scholars in the post- revolutionary period were primarily concerned with examining and analyzing the nature of social order in human society. To understand how order is established and maintained in human collectivities, Dowse and Hughes provide a comprehensive discussion of the nature and types of theories explaining the concept of social order. These theories offer insights into the mechanisms and processes through which social order is achieved and sustained. The Coercion Theory The Coercion Theory of Social Order posits that social order and obedience are achieved through the application of force in human relationships. It argues that individuals, driven by selfishness and power-seeking tendencies, resort to coercion when their interests are threatened. This theory finds expression in various contexts, including interpersonal relationships, historical conquests, and child-rearing practices. Historically, conquests and expansions of territories have been facilitated by the application of physical force. Communities with superior military might subjugated others to maintain dominance and ensure obedience. Additionally, power differentials in inter-communal relations often lead to the use of force to coerce compliance. In everyday interactions, individuals tend to avoid those who instill fear or pose threats of physical harm. Machiavelli's assertion that individuals are more easily influenced by fear than love resonates with this perspective. Moreover, coercive methods, such as corporal punishment, are used in child- rearing to mold behavior and instill societal norms. The employment of force in human relationships is attributed to both innate human tendencies and social experiences. Hobbes, for example, highlighted competition and distrust as inherent characteristics of human nature, leading to the potential application of force. Symbolic interactionism emphasizes the role of social interactions in shaping behavior, suggesting that the nature of interactions influences the use of coercion. Despite its explanatory power, the Coercion Theory has faced criticism. Scholars argue that force is insufficient for long-term obedience and may lead to organized resistance or social disorder. Additionally, it fails to account for social order in stateless societies, where cooperation based on mutual interests replaces centralized coercion. In summary, while the Coercion Theory highlights the role of force in establishing social order, it has limitations in providing a comprehensive explanation and fails to address alternative mechanisms for maintaining order, such as mutual cooperation and shared interests. The Interest Theory The Interest Theory of social order posits that social order arises from the reconciliation of individual and group interests, leading to a relative degree of peace conducive to societal harmony. Unlike the Coercion Theory, which emphasizes the role of force, the Interest Theory highlights the importance of satisfying individual interests to maintain order. According to this theory, individuals contribute to social order not out of coercion or socialization alone but because their interests are accommodated. People act in ways that align with their interests, thereby promoting social stability. The Interest Theory identifies two variants: the prudential variant and the competitive variant. The Prudential Variant of the Interest Theory The Prudential Variant of the Interest Theory emphasizes that individuals, driven by rational self- interest, organize themselves into groups to overcome natural and social obstacles and realize their needs and desires. This variant underscores the role of cooperation and coordination in achieving social order, as individuals come together to address common challenges and pursue shared interests. Throughout history, humans have organized collectively to confront threats and challenges, such as the dangers posed by wild animals during the Old Stone Age. As populations grew and societies transitioned to settled agriculture, cooperation became essential for addressing resource shortages and climatic fluctuations. In this context, cooperation and coordination allowed individuals to pool their efforts and resources to overcome challenges and improve their collective well-being. Central to achieving cooperation is the concept of "equality of benefit," wherein all members of society receive broadly equal rewards for their contributions. This principle fosters a sense of fairness and mutual benefit, incentivizing individuals to cooperate and work together to achieve common goals. By aligning individual interests with collective interests and ensuring that everyone benefits from social engagement, societies can maintain order and stability. The Competitive Variant of the Interest Theory The Competitive Variant of the Interest Theory posits that social order emerges as an unintended consequence of individuals' competitive interactions for scarce resources. Unlike the Prudential Variant, which emphasizes cooperation, this variant highlights competition as a driving force behind social order. Competition is inherent in human nature and manifests in various aspects of life, including politics and the economy. In politics, individuals vie for leadership positions, motivated by self-interest and the desire for status and power. Despite the competitive nature of political contests, adherence to established rules ensures order within the competitive arena and society at large. Similarly, in the economy, individuals pursue their self-interests through rational, calculated decision-making aimed at maximizing personal gain. Economic behavior is guided by natural laws, with individuals negotiating and renegotiating economic relations to benefit themselves. This pursuit of economic self-interest inadvertently contributes to order within the workplace and society, as individuals abide by the rules of the economic system. However, the Competitive Variant has been criticized for its focus on individual efforts in generating social order, potentially overlooking the role of the state. Additionally, competition driven by self- interest may not always lead to social order, as it can exacerbate negative aspects of human nature, such as greed and brutality, especially in highly competitive environments like political contests. Moreover, the theory fails to fully acknowledge the role of societal norms and values in shaping behavior and maintaining social order. Societies instill norms and values in individuals, guiding their attitudes and actions and contributing to the internalization of social order. In summary, while the Competitive Variant highlights the role of competition in fostering social order, it overlooks the influence of societal norms and values and the potential negative consequences of unchecked competition on human behavior. Value Consensus Theory Value Consensus Theory posits that social order arises from the collective commitment of individuals within a group to common values and norms. This theory emphasizes the importance of shared values in fostering cohesion and cooperation among group members, leading to the establishment of social order. According to Durkheim, a strong sense of value integration within a society reduces deviant behavior and promotes social stability. He introduced the concept of the collective conscience, which represents the shared values and moral beliefs that bind individuals together. In societies where consensus on values is high, there is greater social order and solidarity. Talcott Parsons further developed this idea by highlighting the role of moral commitment to common values in maintaining social order. He argued that when individuals internalize and adhere to shared values, they are motivated to conform to the norms associated with those values. This moral commitment among group members facilitates social order, as individuals regulate their behavior based on common standards. However, critics have raised several objections to the Value Consensus Theory. Some argue that empirical evidence does not consistently support the existence of widespread commitment to common values within societies. Additionally, it has been suggested that societal stability may be more influenced by the absence rather than the presence of value consensus. Furthermore, critics contend that the theory portrays individuals as passive recipients of social norms, lacking agency in shaping their own behavior. This perspective overlooks the role of individual autonomy and self-determination in social interactions. From a Marxian perspective, the concept of value consensus may be seen as perpetuating the hegemony of the ruling class by legitimizing existing power structures. Critics argue that social order may be imposed by dominant groups to maintain their position of privilege, rather than arising from genuine consensus among all members of society. In summary, while Value Consensus Theory highlights the role of shared values in promoting social order, it has faced criticism for oversimplifying the complexities of human behavior and overlooking issues of power and inequality within society. Conceptual skills in political sociology In political sociology, understanding power and politics is essential for analyzing how societies function and how individuals and groups interact within them. These concepts help explain social order and disorder, as well as the dynamics of political relationships. Before delving deeper into power and politics, it's important to grasp other key concepts commonly used in political sociology to explore the relationship between society and politics. Some of these vital concepts include: Social Structure: Refers to the patterned social arrangements and relationships that shape society, such as institutions, organizations, roles, norms, and values. Social structure provides the framework within which individuals and groups operate and interact. Social Order: The arrangement of practices and behaviors within a society that maintains stability and predictability. Social order is often maintained through norms, laws, and institutions that regulate behavior and resolve conflicts. Social Disorder: Occurs when there is a breakdown or disruption in social order, leading to instability, conflict, or chaos within society. Social disorder can result from various factors, including inequality, injustice, political unrest, or cultural clashes. Political Behavior: Encompasses the actions, attitudes, and decisions of individuals and groups within a political context. It includes activities such as voting, protesting, lobbying, and participating in political parties or movements. Political Relationships: Refers to the interactions and dynamics between individuals and groups within the political sphere. This includes relationships between citizens and the state, as well as interactions among political actors, such as politicians, interest groups, and political parties. Understanding these concepts helps analysts and researchers in political sociology to explore how power is distributed and exercised within society, how politics shapes social structures and behaviors, and how individuals and groups navigate their roles and relationships within the political landscape. By examining these concepts, scholars can gain insights into the complexities of political life and the dynamics of social change. Political culture Political culture refers to the set of attitudes, beliefs, values, and sentiments that shape individuals' perceptions and behaviors related to politics and the political process within a society. It encompasses the ways in which people understand and engage with political institutions, leaders, and processes. Just as culture influences various aspects of human life, political culture influences how individuals interact with each other and with the political system. Within a society, individuals learn common ideas and beliefs about politics as they grow up in their social environment. This learning process can shape their political attitudes and behaviors. For example, children raised in families that emphasize respect for authority are likely to develop similar attitudes towards political authority. Similarly, individuals living in communities where monetary influence dictates voting behavior may adopt a pragmatic approach to politics, prioritizing material considerations over ideological ones. Political culture is not static but evolves over time as individuals interact with each other and as societal values and norms change. It reflects the collective experiences, histories, and identities of a community or society, providing a framework for understanding and interpreting political phenomena. Overall, political culture plays a crucial role in shaping individuals' perceptions of power, authority, and governance, influencing their participation in political processes and their support for specific policies or leaders. Understanding political culture is essential for comprehending the dynamics of political behavior and decision-making within a society. Almond and Verba (1965) had observed that political culture comprises three basic components (a) cognitive (b) affective (c) evaluational. Cognitive component The cognitive component of political culture encompasses the ideas, knowledge, and beliefs individuals hold regarding politics and the political process. This aspect is shaped by individuals' exposure to political issues, which includes what they are told and what they observe from the political activities within their social environment. The extent of individuals' exposure to political issues influences the nature of their knowledge and beliefs about the political process. This exposure is rooted in their social experiences accumulated over time, which shapes their understanding of politics and political relations among individuals and groups. In essence, the cognitive component of political culture reflects the amount of knowledge individuals possess regarding political issues within their social network. This includes understanding political rules, roles, outputs, and other aspects of the political system. It is through this cognitive lens that individuals interpret and engage with political phenomena, ultimately influencing their political attitudes and behaviors. Affective component The affective component of political culture pertains to individuals' feelings and emotions regarding political rules, roles, and outcomes within the political system. It goes beyond mere thoughts, knowledge, and beliefs, delving into the emotional responses individuals have towards political phenomena. For instance, citizens may have feelings towards governmental policies and programs, ranging from approval and satisfaction to disapproval and frustration. Similarly, their attitudes towards traditional political institutions may be influenced by emotions such as trust, reverence, or skepticism. Regarding elections, individuals' feelings may shape their voting behavior. Some may feel compelled to vote for a candidate based on familial or ethnic ties, while others may prioritize a candidate's political capabilities or policy proposals. These feelings are often informed by individuals' knowledge and beliefs accumulated over time from their experiences with the political process. In essence, the affective component of political culture highlights the emotional responses individuals have towards politics and political processes, which can significantly influence their actions and behavior within the political arena. Understanding these emotional dynamics is crucial for comprehending the complexities of political behavior and decision-making within a society. Evaluation component The evaluational component of political culture focuses on how individuals assess various aspects of their political system. This assessment is influenced by individuals' knowledge of the political system and their emotional responses to it. Their judgments and actions are based on their evaluation of political processes. The nature of individuals' emotional orientation towards the political system plays a crucial role in determining the system's stability and legitimacy. If there is widespread positive sentiment towards political processes, the system tends to enjoy legitimacy and stability. Conversely, if negative feelings prevail, it can lead to a crisis of legitimacy and political instability. Leadership plays a significant role in politically mobilizing citizens to develop a positive disposition towards the political system. Through strategies like promoting patriotism and nationalism, leaders can cultivate a positive orientation among citizens. Political mobilization not only fosters positive sentiments towards the political system but also contributes to development. For instance, Japan achieved industrialization through political mobilization during a period of isolation, while China's agricultural development was propelled by political mobilization in support of specific policies. However, fostering a positive affective orientation towards the political system isn't solely reliant on political mobilization. Good policies, programs, and leadership also play vital roles in instilling positive attitudes among citizens. Based on these components of political culture, Almond and Verba (1963) identified different forms of political cultures across societies, highlighting variations in individuals' orientations towards politics and the political system. The parochial political culture The parochial political culture is characterized by a weak orientation towards political objects and issues among citizens. In this culture, individuals' political orientation is narrow and limited to their local environment, resulting in a lack of broader engagement with political matters. Their cognition, affection, and evaluation of political issues are confined to their immediate surroundings, leading to a limited understanding and involvement in national or broader political processes. Citizens with a parochial orientation typically focus on local political scenes and may prioritize matters such as village leadership, community associations, land ownership disputes, family lineage, or traditional titles. They may be deeply involved in local affairs but show little interest or concern for political developments at the state or national levels. This type of political culture is common in many local communities in Nigeria and elsewhere, where individuals are deeply rooted in their immediate social and cultural contexts. Their political engagement revolves around local concerns and relationships, with limited awareness or involvement in broader political issues. The subject political culture The subject political culture is characterized by citizens who possess a strong cognitive orientation towards political relations within their society. They are well aware of political dynamics, including government policies, actions, programs, and legal enforcements. However, despite their understanding of the political system's outputs, the input institutions, such as legislatures, bureaucracies, and political parties, are poorly developed. Citizens with a subject political culture may have developed affective orientations towards the political system, allowing them to form opinions and preferences regarding political outcomes. However, they exhibit a preference for being led rather than leading. They may lack confidence in themselves or feel reluctant to actively participate in the political process due to a sense of limited personal political power or prowess. As a result, they may demonstrate passive engagement in politics, primarily exercising their voting rights during elections but refraining from more active forms of participation. This type of political culture reflects a situation where citizens may be knowledgeable about politics and its outcomes but feel disempowered or indifferent towards actively shaping political decisions. Their limited sense of political efficacy may discourage them from taking more proactive roles in political processes beyond voting. The participants political culture The participant political culture is characterized by citizens who have sufficient orientation towards both the input and output aspects of the political system. They possess knowledge of political processes at both the local and national or state levels. Unlike those in the subject political culture, citizens in the participant political culture actively engage in political processes within their society, not only as voters but also by taking on politically active roles. Individuals in the participant political culture have confidence in their political efficacy and are willing to participate in politics at various levels, including participatory and elective or representative roles. They take proactive steps to influence political decisions and contribute to shaping the political landscape. However, it's important to note that no society consists entirely of citizens who exhibit attitudes and behavior exclusively aligned with any one type of political culture. As Dowse and Hughes noted, political orientations among citizens are diverse and often result in a blend of two or more ideal types of political cultures. In reality, citizens' political attitudes and behavior reflect a combination of elements from different political cultures, shaping the overall political landscape of a society. On the basis of this, three actual types of political cultures have been identified. These are:- These three actual types of political cultures reflect the complex and varied ways in which citizens engage with the political system: The Parochial-Subject Political Culture: ○ Citizens in this culture have some awareness of political relations and activities beyond their local community but still maintain a relatively low level of personal political efficacy. ○ Their involvement in politics may extend beyond the local level, but they may exhibit a lack of confidence in their ability to effect change or influence political outcomes. ○ Input objects, such as institutions and political roles, are poorly defined, and political participation may be influenced by parochial interests. The Subject-Participant Political Culture: ○ This culture encompasses two categories of citizens: politically passive and politically active. ○ Both categories possess awareness of political activities and issues, but their level of participation differs. ○ Politically passive individuals have low self-esteem and efficacy, leading to minimal engagement in politics beyond basic awareness. ○ Politically active individuals, on the other hand, exhibit high self-esteem and efficacy, actively participating in politics and seeking to influence political outcomes. The Parochial-Participant Political Culture: ○ In this culture, national political objects are relatively developed, and democratic participation is encouraged. ○ However, political inputs are still guided by parochial interests, such as ethnicity or regional affiliations. ○ A prime example of this is the political system in Nigeria during the first republic, where ethnic interests heavily influenced political participation and party alignment. These classifications provide insight into the diverse attitudes and behaviors of citizens towards politics and government. They highlight the complex interplay between local and national interests, as well as the varying levels of political engagement and efficacy among individuals within a society. The individualistic political culture The individualistic political culture is characterized by citizens who view politics primarily as a means of livelihood. They perceive government as a mechanism for distributing rewards to supporters and regulating the economic marketplace to allow individuals to pursue their own self- interests freely. This mindset is often reflected in the behavior of Nigerian politicians, who actively engage in politics mainly to secure personal benefits, such as access to government resources and positions. In this culture, political appointments and allocations of resources are often based on loyalty to the ruling party rather than merit or competence. Certain individuals, known as "godfathers," wield significant influence by providing financial backing and support to elected officials, leading to a patronage system where loyalty is rewarded with access to public funds and positions of power. However, this culture has detrimental effects on the Nigerian political landscape. The focus on personal gain and patronage undermines effective governance and leadership performance, as resources meant for public welfare are often misappropriated or diverted for personal enrichment. The masses suffer from poor living conditions while political elites accumulate wealth and power through corrupt practices. Moreover, societal norms and pressures contribute to the perpetuation of this culture of corruption and self-interest. Embezzlement of public funds is often normalized and even celebrated, particularly among the wealthy and influential, while the impoverished masses are left marginalized and powerless. The pursuit of wealth at all costs in Nigerian society reflects a broader obsession with material success and social status, driven by widespread poverty and inequality. In such a context, individuals feel compelled to accumulate wealth to maintain social standing and avoid the stigma of poverty, perpetuating a cycle of corruption and inequality. The moralistic political culture The moralistic political culture is characterized by a belief that government exists to pursue and achieve moral goals that serve the best interests of the general public. Individuals who adhere to this culture view public office as a means of serving the people and providing moral and just leadership for the advancement of public interests. They advocate for ethical conduct and integrity among public officials, expecting them to lead by example and adhere to high standards of discipline, uprightness, and diligence. In contrast to the individualistic political culture, which prioritizes personal gain and patronage, the moralistic political culture emphasizes the importance of popular participation in politics. It promotes citizen involvement in the political process, particularly through exercising their rights to vote and be voted for. Public officials are expected to be selected based on merit rather than patronage, with skill acquisition, job performance, and qualifications serving as the basis for appointments and promotions. While individuals who hold this political belief do exist in Nigeria, they often face challenges in attaining and maintaining positions of authority. Nigeria's pluralistic society, with its multi-ethnic nature, fosters sentimentality towards ethnic groups over national unity. As a result, public office holders may be influenced by ethnic considerations when making decisions about appointments and promotions. Additionally, Nigeria's young democratic political system is plagued by various difficulties, making it challenging for elected officials to prioritize meritocracy over patronage. Governor Chris Ngige's attempt to prioritize merit-based appointments faced backlash, highlighting the obstacles faced by individuals seeking to uphold moralistic principles in Nigerian politics. Despite these challenges, the moralistic political culture continues to advocate for ethical governance and the pursuit of moral goals for the betterment of society. The traditional political culture The traditionalistic political culture emphasizes the role of government in establishing and maintaining social order, reflecting conservative beliefs that date back to the origins of political sociology. Early political sociologists were concerned with how politics and power could be utilized to preserve social order, particularly in response to the social upheavals of the industrial and French revolutions. In this culture, government is viewed as a tool for serving the interests of the ruling elite, reflecting elitist beliefs about governance. Political decisions and policies are often tailored to benefit the ruling class, with limited opportunities for broader citizen participation in the political process. Political participation is typically restricted to a privileged few who are deemed capable of leadership, reinforcing social stratification and hierarchies. This belief system results in the demarcation of boundaries for political participation among citizens, contrasting with the moralistic political culture, which encourages broad citizen engagement in politics. In Nigeria, this traditionalistic attitude is evident in the recurring presence of certain politicians across different political dispensations, often perpetuating familial or social ties in politics. Political parties are seen as less important than familial or social connections, and appointments and employment are based more on patronage than merit. Overall, the traditionalistic political culture prioritizes social order and the interests of the ruling class, shaping political institutions and practices to maintain existing power structures and hierarchies. Political socialization Political socialization is a critical process through which individuals become familiar with the political system, shaping their perceptions of politics and influencing their reactions to political issues. It involves cognitive orientation towards politics, affecting individuals' emotional disposition and evaluative behavior in relation to political matters. From childhood, individuals are immersed in their social environment, absorbing norms, values, beliefs, and behaviors related to politics and society. Family, peer groups, educational institutions, and media are significant socializing agents that transmit political attitudes and beliefs to individuals. For example, children exposed to parental authority values tend to adopt similar attitudes towards authority figures outside the home. Similarly, peer groups can influence individuals' political orientations, such as endorsing violence as a means of power relations. Political socialization continues throughout life, adapting to changing roles and statuses in adulthood. While family remains influential, other factors such as involvement in political processes and experiences with societal changes also shape political attitudes and behaviors. As individuals navigate different life stages and societal roles, their political behavior may evolve accordingly. Political socialization is vital for the survival of political culture, as it ensures the transmission of values, norms, and beliefs from one generation to another. It enables individuals to acquire political knowledge and fosters their participation in the political process. Ultimately, the nature of political socialization experienced by individuals significantly influences their level of political engagement, attitudes towards political recruitment, and participation in political communication. It reflects how socio-economic and cultural conditions impact individuals' political values, beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors. Classification of political socialization Political socialization can be classified into two main types: latent political socialization and manifest political socialization. Latent Political Socialization: Latent political socialization refers to the unintentional transmission of non-political attitudes that influence individuals' attitudes towards analogous roles and objects in the political system. In cultural settings, individuals acquire training intended to help them function effectively within their environment. However, some of this training inadvertently shapes their attitudes towards politics and the political process. For example, in traditional African societies, values such as respect and obedience are emphasized through proverbs, folklore, and family dynamics. While the primary purpose may be to instill respect for elders, these values also contribute to a broader attitude of obedience towards authority figures, including political leaders. Manifest Political Socialization: Manifest political socialization occurs when individuals receive direct political lessons or experiences that explicitly shape their political attitudes and behavior. This involves deliberate instruction or exposure to political knowledge and experiences. Examples include learning about the political history of a country, studying political philosophy, participating in citizenship education programs, or engaging in political science courses. Additionally, individuals may gain political experiences through active participation in the political process, such as voting, campaigning, or observing political interactions. Both latent and manifest political socialization play significant roles in shaping individuals' political attitudes and behavior. While latent socialization operates indirectly through cultural norms and values, manifest socialization involves direct instruction or experiences related to politics. Together, these forms of socialization contribute to individuals' understanding of politics and their engagement with the political system. Agents of political socialization The family The family plays a crucial role in the political socialization of children, as it is the primary unit of general socialization. Within the family, children are exposed to values, norms, and beliefs that shape their attitudes and behaviors, including those related to politics and political relations. Authority and Power Relations: Children learn about authority and power relations within the family structure, as parents represent the authority figures. Depending on how authority is exercised within the family, children may learn virtues such as obedience, loyalty, and patriotism, which can influence their attitudes toward larger political systems. However, strict application of authority for control purposes may lead to rebellious political attitudes in some children. Gender Roles: Children are socialized into gender roles within the family, as they observe and are assigned specific duties based on their gender. Boys may be assigned tasks involving independence, outdoor activities, and less restriction, while girls may be assigned domestic and caregiving responsibilities. These gender-based roles can shape children's perceptions of politics and their attitudes toward political issues later in life. Observational Learning: Children may directly learn political attitudes and perceptions from politically active parents through observation and interaction. Parents pass on their political loyalties, prejudices, and biases to their children through discussions and interactions within the household. Play and Role-Playing: Children often engage in role-playing activities within the family setting, where they mimic adult roles and behaviors. Through these play situations, children learn about social behavior and familial dynamics, including authority and power dynamics. Role-playing activities provide children with opportunities to practice and internalize political orientations learned from their parents. Overall, the family serves as the initial and most influential agent of political socialization for children, shaping their understanding of politics and their subsequent attitudes and behaviors toward political issues and institutions. Peer group The peer group serves as another influential agent of primary socialization, providing both direct and indirect forms of political socialization to children. Peers exert significant influence over one another through interactions within the group, shaping their attitudes, behaviors, and perceptions, including those related to politics. Influence of Peer Group Dynamics: Children learn communication skills and problem-solving abilities through interactions within their peer groups. They also develop leadership qualities as they navigate group dynamics and work together to achieve common goals. The nature of interactions within the peer group can influence children's attitudes toward authority, power, and political relations. Association with Like-Minded Peers: Children who associate with peers who advocate for certain beliefs or behaviors, such as the use of force to achieve goals, are likely to adopt similar attitudes and behaviors. Peer group association can shape children's perceptions of politics, leading them to view political relations through the lens of force or coercion. Direct Political Socialization within Peer Groups: Politically knowledgeable members of the peer group may influence others by expressing their political views and attitudes. As children observe and interact with politically active peers, they may adopt similar political orientations and behaviors. Peer influence extends beyond childhood and adolescence, forming a continuing reference group throughout an individual's life. Traditional Political Institutions: In traditional societies, age-grade systems serve as a form of political institution where members are given tasks by elders to execute decisions. Through participation in these age-grade systems, members receive cognitive and affective orientations toward the political system and learn political attitudes and behaviors through active engagement in decision-making and implementation processes. The school The school serves as a critical agent of political socialization, offering both direct and indirect forms of political education to students. Here's how: Formal Authority Structure: The school system introduces students to another formal authority structure outside the family, helping them develop submissive and participatory attitudes toward the political system. Through interactions with teachers and adherence to school rules, students learn to respect authority and follow societal norms. Extracurricular Activities: Schools provide opportunities for students to engage in leisure and non-academic activities such as sports, clubs, and societies. Participation in these activities helps students develop organizational and leadership skills, preparing them for future civic engagement and political participation. Curriculum Content: The curriculum often includes social studies courses that cover government operations, citizen rights and duties, and societal values. This direct political education provides students with cognitive orientation to politics and political objects, fostering a sense of civic responsibility and patriotism. Leadership Opportunities: Schools create avenues for students to take on leadership roles, such as student prefects or union members in tertiary institutions. Through these positions, students learn about leadership, responsibility, and decision-making, preparing them for future civic engagement and political participation. National Symbols and Ceremonies: Schools reinforce loyalty and love for the country through rituals like the pledge to the flag and national holiday ceremonies. These activities instill a sense of national identity and pride in students, fostering a lifelong commitment to their country. Promotion of Conformity and Obedience: Textbooks, teacher teachings, and school organization emphasize concepts of conformity and obedience. Students learn to respect rules and authority figures, which are essential qualities for responsible citizenship in a democratic society. Impact of Education on Political Participation: Education plays a significant role in shaping individuals' attitudes toward politics and political issues. More educated individuals tend to be more informed about politics and are more likely to participate in political activities such as voting, joining organizations, and engaging in political discussions. Education enhances individuals' political efficacy and confidence in society and its institutions. In summary, the school system plays a crucial role in shaping students' political attitudes, behaviors, and perceptions through formal education, extracurricular activities, and the promotion of civic values and responsibilities. Mass media The mass media plays a crucial role in political socialization by providing citizens with information and shaping their attitudes and behaviors toward politics. Here's how: Information Dissemination: The mass media, including newspapers, television, radio, and online platforms, provide citizens with a wealth of information on politics and happenings within the political system. This information equips individuals with knowledge about political issues and relations, enabling them to critically evaluate the political system. Public Opinion Formation: Through public opinion polls and coverage of party activities and manifestos, the mass media influences individuals' attitudes toward political candidates and parties. Public ratings of candidates can sway voters' opinions and affect their voting behavior during elections. Exposure to Government Policies: Government policies, programs, and their implementation are exposed to public knowledge through the mass media. Citizens are informed about the actions and decisions of government officials, allowing for public evaluation of these activities. Avenue for Public Evaluation: The mass media not only generates information on political activities but also creates avenues for public evaluation of these activities. Citizens can voice their opinions, critique government actions, and hold leaders accountable through media channels. Control and Influence: Political leaders often attempt to control the mass media to influence public opinion and shape narratives in their favor. This can involve spending resources on media campaigns and propaganda to sway public perception, as seen in the "who the cap fits" campaign during General Sanni Abacha's era in Nigerian politics. Dependency on Media for Information: Many ordinary citizens rely on the mass media for information and interpretation of political events, especially if they are not directly involved in politics or have personal connections to political leaders. Media outlets like FRCN, VOA, and BBC serve as important sources of political news for people across different regions, including remote villages. Overall, the mass media serves as a critical tool for political socialization, shaping individuals' understanding of politics, influencing public opinion, and facilitating civic engagement and accountability. Workplace socialization Workplace socialization plays a significant role in shaping individuals' attitudes toward authority, conformity, and political participation. Here's how: Rules and Regulations: Upon entering the workplace, individuals are introduced to the rules and regulations governing behavior within the organization. This fosters conformity and obedience to authority, which may extend to societal authorities such as the government and the constitution. Legal Authority Structure: The workplace has its own authority structure, with managers holding authority over subordinates. Employees learn to respect and obey this authority, which can influence their perceptions of authority in other contexts, including the political realm. Leadership Development: Managers acquire leadership qualities through managing human resources and coordinating complex activities. Employees, in turn, observe and learn from their managers, developing their own leadership skills or learning the importance of obedience to authority. Understanding Politics: Workplace statuses and roles expose individuals to power dynamics and political relations. Unionized workplaces, in particular, provide opportunities for workers to learn about collective action and democratic participation. Union leaders may serve as interpreters or opinion leaders on government issues, influencing workers' attitudes toward the national political system. Overall, workplace socialization shapes individuals' behavior and attitudes toward authority, conformity, and political participation, providing them with skills and perspectives that extend beyond the workplace into broader societal contexts. Political participation Political participation encompasses the involvement of citizens in the political process of their society, which can vary based on several factors: Education: Literate individuals are more likely to participate in politics as they have access to information through literature and mass media. However, not all educated citizens participate fully, indicating that literacy alone does not guarantee political engagement. Political Socialization: The nature and extent of political socialization individuals receive from their socio-cultural environment significantly influence their political participation. Those who are politically socialized tend to be more active in politics, especially if they associate with politically active individuals. Sex Differential: Gender roles and societal norms may lead to differences in political participation between men and women. Patriarchal societies often limit women's political involvement, although education and family support can enhance their participation. Age Differential: Age restrictions, such as voting age requirements, can limit political participation among younger citizens. Older individuals may have more opportunities for participation due to legal age requirements for certain political positions. Socio-economic Status: Individuals with higher socio-economic status tend to have higher self-esteem and greater access to resources, enabling them to participate more actively in politics. Poverty can hinder political participation due to financial constraints. Occupation: Certain occupations, such as government employees and military personnel, may have limitations on political participation. For example, government workers may be restricted from seeking elective positions without resigning from their positions first. Milbrath categorized citizens into four levels of political participation, ranging from low to high involvement in the political process. These categories provide insight into the varying degrees of engagement among citizens. Political apathetic citizens Politically apathetic citizens exhibit a lack of interest or knowledge in the political events of their community. This indifference can stem from various factors: Political Socialization: Individuals who are not adequately socialized into political values, norms, and beliefs may exhibit apathy towards the political system. For example, women in some societies may receive apolitical socialization, leading to indifference towards politics. Disappointment and Frustration: Some citizens may feel disillusioned or frustrated with the political system due to perceived unfairness or lack of representation. This disillusionment can lead to apathy, as individuals feel disconnected from the political process. Segregation or Marginalization: Citizens who feel marginalized or sidelined within their political community may become apathetic towards political events. If they perceive that their voices are not heard or their concerns are ignored, they may disengage from political participation. Perceived Ineffectiveness: When individuals believe that their participation in the political process will not lead to meaningful change or benefit for themselves or society, they may become apathetic. This feeling of powerlessness can discourage political engagement. Overall, politically apathetic citizens may be aware of political events but choose not to participate due to feelings of disillusionment, frustration, or perceived ineffectiveness of their involvement. Citizens involved in spectators political activities Citizens involved in spectator political activities primarily engage in political discussions and exercise their right to vote. This level of involvement is widespread in various human political communities, ranging from rural to urban areas. Historically, in the Athenian City of Greece, democracy began with a communacratic approach where every citizen participated directly in political discussions and policy formulation, facilitated by the small size of Athens. However, as democratic principles extended to larger political communities, such as modern nation- states, it became impractical for all citizens to gather and participate directly in decision-making processes. This necessitated the introduction of representative political participation, where elected representatives make decisions on behalf of the citizenry. Despite this shift, many citizens still engage in spectator political activities by participating in discussions and exercising their voting rights. While they may not directly shape policy or governance, their involvement remains vital in shaping public opinion and holding elected representatives accountable. Citizens involved in transitional political activities Citizens involved in transitional political activities play an active role in the political process. They go beyond merely being members of political parties and actively participate by attending meetings, contributing financially to support their parties, and assisting political candidates in winning elections. In return for their involvement, they may receive various political appointments, such as board memberships in ministries and government parastatals. This level of engagement helps shape the direction and success of political parties and candidates, influencing the overall political landscape. Citizens involved in gladiatorial political activities Citizens involved in gladiatorial political activities are those who engage at the highest level of participation in politics. They seek elective positions, compelling them to campaign for votes from the electorate. After winning elections, they hold positions of power where they influence both communities and individuals through policies and programs. These individuals are likened to gladiators because they are immersed in the most competitive aspect of political activities, competing with other candidates to gain support and secure public office. This level of engagement represents the pinnacle of political involvement, where the dynamics of realpolitik come to the forefront.

Political Sociology Course Outline PDF

Document Details

Tags

Related

Summary

Full Transcript

Upgrade to continue