Time 2 Talk:

Political Engagement Inequalities. Does your social class reflect your political knowledge?

The subject of youth political involvement in relation to social media, which is now viewed as a new platform for youths to be politically active, was covered in more detail in my first blog. To continue, please click here if you are interested.

Social class inequality and political participation will be the subject of this blog. Social class is a crucial part of one’s identity and the way they may be perceived in society. The experiences one has in life, such as the knowledge they acquire in school, the habits they develop in their family lives, and their involvement in politics, can vary depending on their social class. Additionally, social class is a significant element that influences political engagement, and this is what I will begin to analyse.

Let’s talk STATS.

Political disengagement is the act of not partaking in politics because one does not understand, value, or support the democratic process (Uberoi and Johnston, 2022). The chart below (Fig. 1) explains the social grades, which are essential for interpreting the graphs we will discuss surrounding the problem of social class and political participation.

Grades D and E are typically thought of as belonging to the lower social classes and having less involvement in politics. They are frequently described as being disadvantaged, marginalized, and socially excluded, making them more likely to live in poverty and encounter challenges when trying to participate fully in society and politics (Uberoi and Johnston, 2022).

Figure 2 clearly demonstrates that social classes A, B, and C1 were dissatisfied with the way the UK’s democracy operated, which you may find ironic given that they are perceived to receive preferential treatment because of their social class. Social grades C2, D, and E found it difficult to comprehend politics and felt that politicians did not care about them, which caused them to give less attention to the issues (Uberoi and Johnstone, 2022).

 So, let’s have a look at voter turnout rates amongst these different social grades.

Below in figure 3 we can see that groups DE have a lower voter turnout rate of 53% compared to social groups AB, 68% in the 2019 election (Ipsos Mori, 2019). Overall, group DE has a lower voter turnout percentage out of all groups but why is this the case? Who is responsible for such low statistics?

As the future, I believe it is crucial that we pay special attention to the youth in these social groups. By understanding why young people from lower socioeconomic classes are less politically active, we may be able to bring about change. In accordance with my personal experience, students who attended private schools and came from better social classes than I did were raised with a lot more political knowledge than those who came from working-class backgrounds and attended state schools like myself. As my own political knowledge increased, I continued to question whether I was right to speak up when discussing politics because I doubted whether my political knowledge was sufficient enough. I am just one of many others who most likely felt the same. This is where the issues amongst political participation begin.

Citizenship education but a lack of political knowledge?

What is not adding up?

In order to establish civic standards, citizenship education was developed, as I previously stated in another blog, and it was included in the national curriculum (Green, 1997). Different schools have varying approaches to teaching citizenship, which may have an effect on the figures for political engagement. Even though studies have shown a positive relationship between citizenship education and students’ political outcomes, less than one-third of schools still only offer it as a discrete time slot in their timetables (Kerr et al., 2007). This indicates that citizenship education is not prioritized in many schools, which makes it very difficult for young people to learn about and participate in politics when they are not being taught effectively in the classroom. I experienced this first-hand during my time in school. Schools with a large intake of low SES (socio-economic status) children allow very little time for political activities and subjects such as citizenship education (Hoskins and Janmaat, 2019). As a result, youths from lower social classes are naturally at a disadvantage because they lack the same level of political knowledge as students from schools that place a high priority on citizenship education.

This political cartoon provides a clear illustration of how social inequality can significantly impact learning and knowledge acquisition, and this can be applied to the absence of citizenship education in some institutions with high numbers of low SES students.

Family is another very significant factor that brings out the social inequality in the data on political involvement. For instance, youths learn and acquire certain ideologies through socialization within the household. Students from better-educated backgrounds may talk politics with their parents more at home, which makes them better able to take advantage of the opportunities presented in the classroom (Hoskins and Janmaat, 2019). As a result, young people from lower social classes tend to have less political knowledge, which makes them disinterested in politics and less likely to voluntarily engage in political activities like voting.

What are the solutions?

When young people were asked about politics, their initial responses were that they found it to be boring, perplexing, and too complicated to comprehend (Henn and Foard, 2013). Now is the time to make a change and guarantee that everyone has the opportunity to learn about politics, feel comfortable participating, and have an effect. It should be emphasized in all schools to educate everyone and provide better lessons on political issues. Better education will eliminate the terms “boring” and “confusing” when describing politics, so let’s make that change!

 

Do you agree?

Your opinions are welcome.

 

 

References:

Green, A. (1997) Education, globalization, and the Nation State. New York: St. Martin’s Press

Henn, M. and Foard, N. (2013) “Social differentiation in young people’s political participation: The impact of social and educational factors on youth political engagement in Britain,” Journal of Youth Studies, 17(3), pp. 360–380. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2013.830704.

Hoskins, B. and Janmaat, J.G. (2019) Education, democracy and inequality: Political engagement and citizenship education in Europe. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Ipsos Mori (2019) How the voters voted in the 2019 election, How Britain voted in 2019 election . Ipsos Mori. Available at: https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2019-12/general-election-2019-poll-aggregate-v8.pdf

Ipsos Mori (2009) Mediact thoughtpiece social grade July09 – Ipsos, Social Grade, A Classification Tool. Ipsos Media. Available at: https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/publication/6800-03/MediaCT_thoughtpiece_Social_Grade_July09_V3_WEB.pdf

Kerr, D. et al. (2007) Vision versus pragmatism: Citizenship in the secondary school curriculum in England: Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Fifth annual report. London: Department for Education and Skills.

Uberoi, E. and Johnston, N. (2022) Political disengagement in the UK: Who is disengaged?, House of Commons Library.House of Commons. Available at: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-7501/