This article discusses the impacts of political socialization on political behavior; that is how people behave, the totality of their dominant attitudes, values and orientation in the day to day relationship of individuals and groups with their political environment.
As asserted in the earlier 8 major agents of political socialization, the family and the
school are the principal agents of political socialization in the modern world,
and they are the ones specifically isolated for discussion and analysis in this
post.
However,
while using the socialization in the family and the school to assess political behavior
of individuals and groups, we do not underrate the other agents of
socialization. School and family are just used as models, so, students should,
in their personal studies, apply the peer group, religious institutions, age,
race, etc for analysis, using similar methods.
Table of content
At the end
of this article you are expected to gain the knowledge of:
(a) The
relationship between political socialization and the behavior of people towards
politics.
(b)
How the family and the school socialization specifically affect people’s
political behavior
Read On: Definitions and Forms of Political Culture
Patterns of Socialization in the Family
There are
several ways in which patterns of socialization in the family can influence
political behavior exhibited by children who are raised in that family. Some
four of these ways are authority patterns, socio-economic status (SES), civic
orientations or knowledge, and political participation patterns all in the
family.
In what
follows we offer detailed discussion of these four factors.
(a)
Authority Patterns in the Family
The
individual's predisposition to participate in, or withdraw from politics may be
influenced by his early relationship with his parents. In a family situation
where authority is dispersed, where there is warmth between the child and his
parents, and where disciplinary control is more liberal, flexible and
permissive, where children are encouraged to engage in debate and analysis of
issues before important decisions are taken, offspring and other members of the
family will ideally turn out active in politics. They are more likely to engage
authorities, query facts, policies and decisions, and, in short, operate with a
high sense of political efficacy: the degree to which an individual feels he
can influence or determine political decisions.
Children
raised in a liberal family environment will tend to develop either transitional
or gladiatorial participant attitudes (these shall be discuss under political
participation); not likely to be spectatorial.
Conversely,
however, a family setting where authority is concentrated in one person
(usually the father), where there is no closeness or warmth between the child
and his parents, and where disciplinary patterns are extremely severe, the
child may become too subservient, too passive and too psychologically insecure
in life. Scientifically speaking, such child is most likely to grow up as a
conservative being. He or she sees whatever the people in authority do as final
and may not have any effrontery to challenge it. His political participation is
likely to e spectatorial, his ideology conservative and his attitude either
docility or mere endorsement.
(b)
Family’s' Socio-Economic Status (SES) The socio
economic condition of the family as a socializing agent contributes to
children’s ultimate political behavior. People of high socio economic status
often tend to be more active and prominent in politics because in most cases
they would have conquered hunger and most material deprivations, so, they have
enough time to sit, theorize and query issues around them.
The
lower-status people, on the other hand, are often preoccupied with resolving
material contradictions and other basic needs in their lives, so, they have
little time to sit and think ablaut politics. Justin Labinjoh captures this
class dimension to political behavior when he declared that “socio economic
circumstances always constrain members of various classes to relate
differentially to the social structure,” and that such has “implications for
individual dramaturgical skills and therefore for the individual's perception
of social reality”
Moreover,
because children from higher status families are in a better position to
benefit from other socializing institutions such as the mass media and elite
schools which encourage civic or participant attitudes, at least compared to
children of poorer parents, the political behavior of the former tends to be proactive.
In
addition, socio economic condition greatly influences authority patterns in the
family, to the extent that liberal child-rearing practices tend to characterize
higher status families, while authoritarian practices tend to typify
lower-status families. As a result of this, people from higher status
backgrounds may be better disposed psychologically and normatively to
participate in politics than those from lower backgrounds.
(c) Family’s Civic
Knowledge and Orientations
The
dominant knowledge of politics or overall orientation towards socio political
events in a family often carries serious weight in how offspring of the family
are socialized. Politically conscious or ideologically deep parents may are
more likely to encourage the discussion of politics in their homes, and by so doing
they increase the interests and understanding of politics in their children and
other people living and around the family.
(d)
Family’s Political Involvement or Participation
Biographical
accounts of famous political leaders are full of instances of children who have
followed in their parents' footsteps by becoming very active politicians
because an intensely politicized family atmosphere stimulates activist
tendencies or attitudes in the offspring in the family. Consequently, offspring
in politically active families eventually turn out as activists themselves; a
situation made possible through a principle of social learning called
imitation. A good example is that of the Nigerian musician/political activist
called Fela Anikulapo Kuti whose counter cultural and anti-establishment
political disposition was largely imitated from the activities of his mother
and father. At this point you may want to read about social learning principles
and theories, especially that of Albert Bandura. The 2011 University of Lagos
doctoral dissertation of Eesuola Olukayode, as supervised by Professor Remi
Anifowose also promises to be a useful source of how the family socializes
people into certain pattern of political behaviour. So, this part of the unit
has identified how socialization patterns in the family, especially the issues
concerning authority patterns, socio-economic status, civic knowledge and
political involvement influence political behaviour of people.
Socialization
in the School and its Effects on Political Behaviour
Apart from
the family, the educational system of a country plays an important role in the
inculcation of attitudes and values that can shape the nature and degree of
people’s political behaviour in the society. This is where the school comes in.
The relationships between the school authorities and students, the pattern of
relations among the students themselves, the content of civic courses and the
general organization and administration of the school system all play
significant roles in implanting or inhibiting certain attitudes and
dispositions of people towards politics.
In two
specific ways this can be done:
(a)
Content of Curriculum
A school
where civic education, politics, political history or subjects of revolution
cuts across classes and levels of learning is likely to socialize students into
a more active political behaviour; vice versa. In like manner, if, instead of
the foregoing subjects, students are generally thought religiosity and
doctrines under the guise of mission schools for instance, it is not unlikely
to socialize students into dogmatic and conservative political attitudes.
Formal learning in schools, in the forms of cognitive engagement of students,
affects the political behaviour of students who school there.
(b)
Dimensions of Extra Curricular Activities
Another
major means by which the educational system can tangentially influence
students’ political behaviour is through involvement in school activities,
particularly at the secondary and, or tertiary levels. Secondary schools that
have organizations such as the press club, literary and debating society, as
well as para military organizations such as Man o War will often periodically
discuss issues of and around politics. Selection of prefects in the school can
also be made through free and fair elections. In tertiary institutions also,
activities such as students unionism, faculty and departmental associations as
well as membership of special committees can also greatly combine to influence
the political behaviour of students therein, compared to a university where all
these are not permitted to occur. In essence, involvement in school activities
can be an important influence on the individual's subsequent political
behaviour at the larger strata of the society.
Read On: What is Political Participation? - Definition, Forms & Examples in Nigeria
Conclusion
on Impacts
of Political Socialization on Political Behaviour
Let
us conclude with a reminder that other agents of political socialization
discussed in this booklet, the mass media, religious groups, political parties,
age and gender; as well as others not discussed: race, occupational groups and
government agencies also play an important role in influencing an individual's
dispositions attitudes and behavior towards politics.