Political Science For Dummies. Marcus A. Stadelmann
Читать онлайн книгу.
For them, democracy needed a certain, specific culture, which they titled the civic culture, to survive in the long run. So they set out to discover the characteristics of a civic culture. They believed that if they discovered a political culture that could sustain democracy, they could change other cultures to create this civic culture and then make sure democracy survived. In their research, they discovered the following five components of a civic culture, necessary to sustain a democracy:
A large middle class: A large middle class has to exist in a democracy, because it’s the class most likely to possess democratic values. If the middle class is small and other nondemocratic classes such as an aristocracy or a radicalized working class dominate society, there’s a good chance that an authoritarian regime can come to power.
A secular society: A society has to be secular with no state religion in place. Religion has to be kept out of government, because many religions hold nondemocratic values. If religion dominates society like in Iran today, democracy isn’t possible.
Pluralism: A democratic society has to allow for the creation of political parties and interest groups to represent the will of the people. In other words, people have to be able to organize and express their wishes to government.
A culture of consensus: A society has to agree on the major political issues shaping it. These include form of government and economic structure. Almost all Americans agree that democracy is the best form of government and that a form of capitalism is the best economic structure for a society. In Russia, on the other hand, such a consensus doesn’t exist. About one-third of all Russians believe in democracy and capitalism, while the other two-thirds support either strong man rule or a return to communism. This makes it tough for democracy to set foot in Russia.
Permission of moderate change: Government and its people have to be willing to change over time. With societies and the world constantly changing, there has to be a willingness to accept change and adapt to it. Societies that don’t change, for either political or religious reasons, will fall behind globally and become pariah nations. In addition, they’ll face constant battles at home between citizens ready for change and those who want to stick with the status quo. Iran and Afghanistan are two good examples of such societies.
Being behavioral in nature
The civic culture is a classical behavioral study (see Chapter 2). Almond and Verba researched human behavior through empirical testing. For this reason, they set out and interviewed 5,000 people — 1,000 in each one of the five countries they had selected for their research. The five countries were two successful democracies, the U.S. and Great Britain; two classical failures of democracy, West Germany and Italy; and one lesser developed country, Mexico. The attempt was to find a culture in these five countries that could sustain democracy in the long run. If that was possible, a blueprint for democracy could be created to bring this civic culture to other countries. This in turn would allow for democracy not only to be spread globally but to actually maintain it over time.
Asking questions
In their study, Almond and Verba decided to personally interview 5,000 people in five countries. The most relevant questions concerning political culture were centered on these topics:
Cognition: They asked people whether they were familiar with their national government, knew about officeholders, and most important, knew how they could participate in the political process. The results were that knowledge of government and participation were high in Great Britain, West Germany, and the U.S. At the same time, cognition was high in northern Italy and low in southern Italy. In Mexico, cognition was low at the national level; however, at the local level, Mexicans were keenly aware of their political structures.
Feelings toward the system: Feelings of pride and support of the current form of government were very high in Great Britain and the U.S. In West Germany, people weren’t very proud of the structure of the system but supported it because it was efficient and delivered the goods. In Mexico, people were proud and supported their local system, but not their national political structure.
Partisanship: In both the U.S. and Great Britain, partisanship was low. Political science usually measures partisanship in a society by asking the following question: “Would you allow your child to marry someone with a different partisan identification?” Although this wasn’t a problem in Great Britain and the U.S., parents not having much of a problem being a Democrat and their child marrying a Republican, it matters in the other three countries. In both West Germany and Italy, people expressed great partisanship by refusing to consider such a marriage. In Mexico, the question wasn’t relevant because Mexico at this time was a one-party state ruled by the PRI (Institutional Revolutionary Party).
Civic obligation: The questions of civic obligation involved feeling an obligation to participate in politics by voting or participating in other ways. In both the U.S. and Great Britain, civic obligation was high, while in West Germany, people expressed an obligation to vote, but that was about it. In Italy and Mexico, feelings of civic obligation were low.
Civic competence: Civic competence refers to the public believing that it has an obligation to join and participate in civic organizations such as charities and religious organizations or just volunteering and helping members of the community. The U.S. scored highest in this category, with Great Britain coming in second. In West Germany and Italy, civic competence was low, most people believing that it was the government’s obligation to help the needy. In Mexico, civic competence was high at the local level but almost nonexistent at the national level.
Trust: This category refers to whether people trust the government to do what is right. While Americans and the British had a high level of trust in their government, West Germans and Italians did not. Mexicans, on the other hand, showed trust in the local government but not the national government.
Based on results from these questions, Almond and Verba categorized cultures in the five countries they studied and came up with not just one civic culture but three political cultures they found in each country. Furthermore, each country had a mix of the three cultures. See more on this in the next section.
Finding three political cultures
The three cultures Almond and Verba found in each of the five countries are parochial political culture, subject political culture, and participant political culture.
Parochial political culture
In a parochial political culture, people don’t care very much about their national government. They don’t have a lot of information on it, have no attachment to it, and make no demands on it. In other words, people expect nothing from their national government and want it to leave them alone. They don’t like or dislike it and don’t participate in national politics.
At the same time, the parochial population is very close to their local form of government. In Mexico, for example, the people were familiar with their small city government structures, knew their mayors, and participated in local elections. They felt close to the locality and supported it.
Parochial cultures can still be found in remote parts of the U.S., such as rural West Virginia, and in tribal societies, such as Afghanistan and some African countries.
Subject political culture
In a subject political culture, citizens tend to have a high level of political information. They’re familiar with many important issues of the day and know how to participate in the political process. However, they feel powerless and believe that their opinions don’t matter. In other words, they lack political efficacy. Further, they don’t have an attachment to the political system and don’t express any positive emotions toward it. They just expect benefits from government. As long as the government delivers the goods, subjects tend be passive and