Whether at parties, around the dinner table, or at the office, people talk about politics all the time. Yet while such conversations are a common part of everyday life, political scientists know very little about how they actually work. In Talking about Politics, Katherine Cramer Walsh provides an innovative, intimate study of how ordinary people use informal group discussions to make sense of politics. Walsh examines how people rely on social identities—their ideas of who "we" are—to come to terms with current events. In Talking about Politics, she shows how political conversation, friendship, and identity evolve together, creating stronger communities and stronger social ties. Political scientists, sociologists, and anyone interested in how politics really works need to read this book.
Those who analyze public opinion have long contended that the average citizen is incapable of recounting consistently even the most rudimentary facts about current politics; that the little the average person does know is taken strictly from what the media report, with no critical reflection; and that the consequence is a polity that is ill prepared for democratic governance. And yet social movements, comprised by and large of average citizens, have been a prominent feature of the American political scene throughout American history and have experienced a resurgence. William Gamson asks, how is it that so many people become active in movements if they are so uninterested and badly informed about issues? The conclusion he reaches in this book is a striking refutation of the common wisdom about the public's inability to reason about politics.
During the Brexit referendum campaign it became clear how easily national conversations around politics could become raucous and bitter. This book explores the nature of talking about politically contentious issues and how our society can begin to develop a more constructive culture of political talk. Uniquely, this study focuses on citizens own experiences and reflections on developing, practising and evaluating their own political voices. Based on seventy in-depth interviews with a diverse range of people, Stephen Coleman explores the intricate nature of interpersonal political talk and what this means for public attitudes towards politics and how people negotiate their political identities. Engaging with a broad range of subjects from Political Communication to Sociology this book offers valuable insight into how the public can discuss politically turbulent topics in a meaningful and constructive way.
During the Brexit referendum campaign it became clear how easily national conversations around politics could become raucous and bitter. This book explores the nature of talking about politically contentious issues and how our society can begin to develop a more constructive culture of political talk. Uniquely, this study focuses on citizens own experiences and reflections on developing, practising and evaluating their own political voices. Based on seventy in-depth interviews with a diverse range of people, Stephen Coleman explores the intricate nature of interpersonal political talk and what this means for public attitudes towards politics and how people negotiate their political identities. Engaging with a broad range of subjects from Political Communication to Sociology this book offers valuable insight into how the public can discuss politically turbulent topics in a meaningful and constructive way.
Why are political conversations uncomfortable for so many people? The current literature focuses on the structure of people's discussion networks and the frequency with which they talk about politics, but not the dynamics of the conversations themselves. In What Goes Without Saying, Taylor N. Carlson and Jaime E. Settle investigate how Americans navigate these discussions in their daily lives, with particular attention to the decision-making process around when and how to broach politics. The authors use a multi-methods approach to unpack what they call the 4D Framework of political conversation: identifying the ways that people detect others' views, decide whether to talk, discuss their opinions honestly—or not, and determine whether they will repeat the experience in the future. In developing a framework for studying and explaining political discussion as a social process, What Goes Without Saying will set the agenda for research in political science, psychology, communication, and sociology for decades to come.
""Conversation theory tells us that individuals arrive at meaning through conversation (Pask 1980). Conversation is defined as "the kind of speech that happens informally, symmetrically, and for the purposes of establishing and maintaining social ties" (Thornbury and Slade 2006: 25). In this book we explore the importance of engaging in political conversation and talk within political discussion networks for developing connections that foster political engagement. Importantly, this refers to informal discussion "of politics and current events that occurs within a social network of peers: friends, colleagues, family members, and other individuals who are present in our social environment" (Klosftad 2011: 9). We understand intuitively that people might find themselves in conversations about politics or current events. We discuss what is happening in the world with friends. We discuss the latest news with colleagues in the workplace. Growing up, we depend upon our family members, teachers, and others to educate us, through conversation, about how the political system works and what our role is within it. What is so critical about these informal conversations, and one of the reasons why they are so powerful, is that they are casual and impromptu - they are typically the byproducts of people going about their daily activities and routines (Downs 1957; Walsh 2004, Klofstad et al. 2009). Yet we also know that these conversations are happening within very different community contexts; people's social environments are not all the same, particularly along the lines of ethnorace , gender, and partisanship. As the opening quote from a formerly incarcerated Latino male canvasser from the South Los Angeles organization Community Coalition indicates, the types of conversations he has within his community members, and the knowledge he gains from them, matter, and are mediated by his life experiences and those of his community. It is important to remember that the political opportunity structures that exist within those social environments vary in important ways (Meyer and Minkoff 2004). This is especially true in areas with high levels of ethnoracial segregation, which has increased in the United States, particularly among Whites (Frey 2015). This ethnoracial segregation may be correlated with partisan segregation. Because White racial identity is highly associated with Republican party identification (Jardina 2019), predominantly White communities are also likely to be predominantly Republican. Similarly, African Americans almost exclusively identify with the Democratic Party (Frymer 2010), meaning that African American communities are likely to be strongly Democratic. Thus, community composition can have political consequences in terms of determining the types of individuals with whom a person may be in conversation (e.g. Huckfeldt and Sprague 1988, p. 470; Djupe and Sokhey 2014). Beyond potential geographic homogeneity based on the correlation between ethnorace and partisanship, we know that political discussion networks are largely homogeneous in terms of partisanship (Huckfeldt et al. 2004; Mutz 2006). Political discussion networks are a subset of one's broader social network, which includes the people with whom one discusses politics (Sinclair 2012). While we know that in general Democrats tend to talk about politics with other Democrats and Republicans tend to discuss politics with other Republicans, we know less about the ethnoracial makeup of these political discussion networks. Because few studies exploring political discussion networks include diverse samples, we know even less about how the partisan composition of political discussion networks varies across non-white groups, with the exception of some pioneering work by Leighley and Matsubayashi (2009). It is important to consider whether the presumed benefits of political discussion networks are afforded to all groups in the same ways. For instance, research has found that one of the main benefits of political discussion networks is that individuals are exposed to information about politics. When discussion networks are homogeneous, however, individuals are likely to be exposed to information from only one perspective. Being embedded in a political echo chamber can affect how individuals interpret political information. Studies have shown that party identification can affect individuals' willingness to believe certain claims, what Bolsen et al. (2013) call partisan motivated reasoning. Research suggests that social media may be exacerbating these trends, with the result that people tend to be connected to, and receive information from, those that share their interests (Bisgin et al. 2010; but see Settle 2018; Garrett 2009a, 2009b; Stroud 2008). ""--
Prayers to guide your journey of raising kids in a complicated world. In an age of distraction and overwhelm, finding the words to meaningfully pray for our children--and for our journey as parents--can feel impossible. Written with warmth and welcome, To Light Their Way gives voice to your prayers when words won't come. Filled with more than 100 modern liturgies, this book guides you into an intentional conversation with God for your children and the world they live in. From everyday struggles like helping your child find friends or thrive in school to larger issues like praying for a brighter world rooted in peace and truth, these pleas and petitions act as a gentle guide, reminding us that while our words may fail, God never does. At the core of To Light Their Way is the deepest of prayers: that our children will experience the love of God so deeply that their lives will be an outpouring of love that lights up the world.
NATIONAL BESTSELLER To get ahead today, you have to be a jerk, right? Divisive politicians. Screaming heads on television. Angry campus activists. Twitter trolls. Today in America, there is an “outrage industrial complex” that prospers by setting American against American, creating a “culture of contempt”—the habit of seeing people who disagree with us not as merely incorrect, but as worthless and defective. Maybe, like more than nine out of ten Americans, you dislike it. But hey, either you play along, or you’ll be left behind, right? Wrong. In Love Your Enemies, social scientist and author of the #1 New York Times bestseller From Strength to Strength Arthur C. Brooks shows that abuse and outrage are not the right formula for lasting success. Brooks blends cutting-edge behavioral research, ancient wisdom, and a decade of experience leading one of America’s top policy think tanks in a work that offers a better way to lead based on bridging divides and mending relationships. Brooks’ prescriptions are unconventional. To bring America together, we shouldn’t try to agree more. There is no need for mushy moderation, because disagreement is the secret to excellence. Civility and tolerance shouldn’t be our goals, because they are hopelessly low standards. And our feelings toward our foes are irrelevant; what matters is how we choose to act. Love Your Enemies offers a clear strategy for victory for a new generation of leaders. It is a rallying cry for people hoping for a new era of American progress. Most of all, it is a roadmap to arrive at the happiness that comes when we choose to love one another, despite our differences.
How we talk about issues in American society, not changing political institutions, is the remedy for political polarization. American politics is better understood from four impartial perspectives-Loyal, Tactful, Detached, and Caring. Immigration, climate change, and other controversial issues are better understood from the four perspectives.
