Apathy in the UK?

Because social exclusion generates: ‘…. worrying levels of apathy, ignorance, and cynicism about public life’, which ‘could and should be remedied’
Crick Report’s (1998, p.8)

• Apathy in the UK is currently unravelling the social fabric of our democracy as more and more people are opting out of voting by seeing no difference between the political parties (English et al, 2016). In the meantime, these political parties have become the provinces of middle-class technocrats wishing to deliver cognitive systems of management and control within society (Horton, 2020). Seemingly as Young (2012) also detailed there is a convergence of ideas between left and right, where the role of neo-liberalism is viewed as the route to consumer happiness.

• People are largely governed by paternalist elites who seek to impose their ideologies on the masses without explaining their value (Zsolt, 2016). Virtue signalling has become the norm whilst real everyday problems around sustaining emotional well-being, childhood trauma, domestic violence, food banks use, harassment by the DWP, Social Services and TV Licence people are simply wished away (Whittington, 2014). T

• Moreover, poverty, social exclusion, and symbolic violence (Bourdieu, 1996) are routinely inflicted upon the socially excluded: viewed as vote winners amongst the technocratic parties who lack insight that the world, they inhabit is an imperfect bubble. Meanwhile, the social fabric continues to disintegrate with the formation of these in-groups and out-groups based upon perceived virtue signalling. The poorer sectors of society known as the precariat (Savage, 2015) die earlier and live less healthy lives (Gray, 1982) have built up their resentment into a crescendo with Brexit.

• Ordinarily the precariat is least likely to vote, constantly reinforcing their social exclusion whilst at the same being susceptible to populist ideas propounded by the Far Right. Populist parties upset the normality of the middle-class technocratic elite’s habitus (Bourdieu, 1984) as they allow those excluded to vote out those social classes who normally stand as political candidates and committee members who vote (for each other).

• Populist parties capture mass resentment but behind the scenes these are backed by the ultra-wealthy who seek to mass mobilise the poor to maintain their sinister control. They win legitimacy by stoking resentment and using the poor as cannon fodder to maintain their extreme wealth and privilege (De Vries & Hobolt, 2020)

• Only by engaging in political debate and making sense of the various social dynamics can those in power be held accountable to the populace. People who usually hold high office and govern without scrutiny, can be made accountable. In the meantime, as the public becomes involved in politics, they must know what is at stake.

• In citizenship education delivered in schools provides a pathway for learning and building social cohesion. Instead of being used as vehicles of resentment young people. can learn about how democracy works, and they can draw on this to challenge the decisions that are enacted without talking to them. This requires however further research (Donbavand & Hoskins, 2021).

Intervention: Breaking the Chain

Citizenship Education (CE) was placed on the school curriculum from 2002 onwards for 11–16-year-olds where education was used as a vehicle to break the chains of intergenerational exclusion (Janmaat, & Hoskins, 2021). After taking part in CE, young people were found to have developed their political, social, and cultural insights plus they enhanced their interpersonal skills. By building their social and cultural capital they developed a new set of skills and enhanced their social confidence (Bourdieu, 1984). The aim is to revitalise democracy by creating a new informed set of citizens see Appendix 2 and Appendix 3.

Accountability and Transparency

• Citizenship Education (CE) seeks to ensure those in power are rendered accountable where those previously excluded develop the tools to challenge the elites. The ways that society operates are suddenly rendered transparent.

• Not only are poorer people heard but they can also ensure those who govern are held accountable for their actions. It means those who formerly patronised and ostracised suddenly enter the realms of power and ensure the technocrats and bureaucrats are made accountable. No longer can these groups hide in the shadows.

Hope is Dancing on the Horizon

• Evidence for the positive impact of Citizen Education is that the young people are: “more likely to have positive attitudes and intentions towards civic and political participation (both in the present and in the future) if they had high levels of ‘received citizenship’”) (Keating et al., 2010, p. vi).  The following provide an insight into the benefit of CE and how it builds the students potential Appendix Number 1)

 

 

 

 

 

Appendices

Number 1

CE and the Key Skills that are promoted which generates Active Citizenship
accountability

• Building self confidence
• Generating Autonomy
• Respect for Others
• Mutual Support
• Resolving Conflict
• Empathic connection
• Self-Awareness/Reflexivity
• Listening and Effective Interaction
• Cultural Awareness
• Multi perspective
• Analytical Skills
• Data analysis
• Emotional Literacy
• Creativity
• Multiple Intelligence
• Understanding World at Present world
• Critical Analysis
• Justice
• Human Rights
• Development
• Non-Discrimination
• Community Development
• Autonomy

Source: Council of Europe (2016)

 

 

Number 2 

3 Types of Citizens

 

1.Individualised Citizen

This person pays taxes and volunteers whilst providing food to a food bank and appear socially responsible. This citizen organises communities for a particular cause by cleaning up the environment.

 

2.Participatory Citizen

The citizen who participates is someone who organises communities in relation to a particular cause. They help to clean up the environment and know how the governance systems work.

 

3.Justice Orientated Citizen

This type of citizen can understand the various social, political, and economic constraints people live within. They can see beyond the surface into the depth of the various problems that arise.

Instead of focussing upon the immediate needs they seek to show how these issues have arisen. They are more concerned with long terms strategies than short term gains. In a resolution of these issues, they seek to question the established regimes and look at how injustice has become normalised within society.

 

Source: Westheimer and Kahne (2004, p. 240)

 

 

Number 3

Crick’s version of CE outlined in three strands:

1. Social and moral responsibility

Develop self-confidence and social confidence whilst developing solidarity and making the population aware around how people govern and can be made accountable.

2. Community involvement

The focus is on developing community cohesion because society is in danger of unravelling.

3. Political literacy

Making the different forms of governance transparent whilst becoming aware of the various procedures that are used. This allows the individual to develop insights around how to complain and enforce decision making.

 

Source (DfEE/QCA, 1998, pp. 11-13).

 

 

 

 

References

 

Bourdieu M (1984) Distinction, Abingdon Oxon: Routledge

Bourdieu, M. (1992) The Logic of Practice, Cambridge, Polity Press

Council for Europe (2016) Charter on Education for Democratic Citizenship and Human Rights Education, https://www.coe.int/en/web/human-rights-education-youth/edc/hre-charter Accessed 20th March 2022

DFE (1998) Education for citizenship and the teaching of democracy in schools, https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/4385/1/crickreport1998.pdf Accessed 20th March, 2022

De Vries, C.E. and Hobolt, S.B., (2020) Challenger Parties and Populism. LSE Public Policy Review, 1(1), p.3. DOI: http://doi.org/10.31389/lseppr.3

Donbavand, S. & Hoskins B. (2021). “Citizenship Education for Political Engagement: A Systematic Review of Controlled Trials,” Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-19, April.

 

English, P., Grasso, M. T., Buraczynska, B., Karampampas, S. and Temple, L. (2016), Convergence on Crisis? Comparing Labour and Conservative Party Framing of the Economic Crisis in Britain, 2008-14. Politics & Policy, 44: 577–603

Gray AM. (1982) Inequalities in health. The Black Report: a summary and comment. Int J Health Serv;12(3):349-80. doi: 10.2190/XXMM-JMQU-2A7Y-HX1E. PMID: 7118327.

Horton R. (2020) The coming technocracy, Volume 396, Issue 1026 :https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32668-4

Janmaat, J. Hoskins, B (2021) The Changing Impact of Family Background on Political Engagement During Adolescence and Early Adulthood, Social Forces, soab112, https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soab112

Savage, M. (2015) Social Class in the 21st Century, London: Penguin

Westheimer, J., & Kahne, J. (2004). What Kind of Citizen? The Politics of Educating for Democracy. American Educational Research Journal, 41(2), 237–269. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3699366

 

Whittington D. (2014) The Perpetual Treadmill, Milton Keynes: Authorhouse

 

Young J. (2012) The Criminological Imagination, London: Sage

 

Zsolt E. (2016) Paternalist populism and illiberal elitism in Central Europe, Journal of Political Ideologies, 21:1, 9-25, DOI: 10.1080/13569317.2016.1105402