Political socialization is the process through which
attitudes and beliefs are acquired through learning and social experience.
Heywood in this article talks about various agents but he sets mass media as
the most prominent agent of this socialization, however I would focus on the
role of family.
Family has been listed as one of the agents, but its impact
has been diminished due to education and higher levels of awareness. I’d like
to disagree. Primary socialization is what shapes your identity, thinking and
thought processes since an early age. When a child is born, the mind is like a
blank slate and the first factors which get their points and views written on
that slate are not media and anything else but family. An individual is likely
to mostly go along the ideology of his family. He’s more likely to support the
views and ideas and beliefs of his family, whether they are political or
social. Lets face it, not many would want to go against their families,
especially those families that are highly politically involved. Taking a
personal example, one of my friends father is an influential leader in the MQM.
He himself is secretly a PTI supporter, but he confides in despair that he has
been taught since childhood, there is no other party to support in Pakistan,
than MQM. Similarly, a couple of “educated” friends mine base their political affiliations
in line with the teachings of their family.
Thus I would like to conclude, the role of family is a very
prominent agent in the process of political socialization and it will always
remain one, regardless of the growing influence of mass media or the level of
education that the people achieve in life.
4 comments:
I agree with your view to a certain extent - initially family has the most influence when it comes to political socialization. However, don't views change eventually as one is exposed to media and other external factors?
The example you have given shows that your friend, despite being taught by his family to support MQM, supports PTI. Doesn't this show that there are external factors at play?
I think it is better to not give precedence to a particular factor when determining its effect of political socialisation.
As Heywood mentions, there is no concrete way to empirically determine the magnitude of the effect of a certain agent of political socialisation.
I agree family plays a huge role in influencing a persons political socialization. However, I think this is more the case with conservative societies such as ours and others like ours. Where family is actually given importance to. However in western societies where there are generations of educated people in the family, it is not necessary that they enforce their political preferences on their child. There is tolerance and acceptance of difference in thought. Furthermore, I think no matter how educated an individual is, media can manipulate the truth and influence political thought and that is evident in how political stereotypes continue to exist even in a country like America which claims to be highly educated.
Sonia and Maryam I agree that Media obviously eventually also plays a major part in manipulating ones views. My point in this blog was that people should not forget the importance of family views on political socialization. In my example, even though the friend supported PTI, not only did he have to vote for MQM but he will also eventually down the line join MQM officially due to family's influence.
Post a Comment