Academics from a range of disciplines join with political activists to explore the meaning of politics and citizenship in contemporary society and the current forms of political (dis)engagement, providing a timely interdisciplinary dialogue and interrogation of contemporary political practices.
Many political observers, struck by low turnout rates among young voters, are pessimistic about the future of democracy in Canada and other Western nations. Citizens in general are disengaged from politics, and young people in particular are said to be adrift in a sea of apathy. Building on these observations, Paul Howe examines patterns of participation and engagement from both the past and present, concluding that young Canadians are, in fact, increasingly detached from the political and civic life of the country. Two key trends underlie this development: waning political knowledge and attentiveness and generational changes in the norms and values that sustain social integration. As Citizens Adrift shows, putting young people back on the path towards engaged citizenship requires a holistic approach, one which acknowledges that democratic engagement extends beyond the realm of formal politics.
Rules of Disengagement examines the reasons men and women in the military have disobeyed orders and resisted the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It takes readers into the courtroom where sailors, soldiers, and Marines have argued that these wars are illegal under international law and unconstitutional under U.S. law. Through the voices of active duty service members and veterans, it explores the growing conviction among our troops that the wars are wrong. While the Obama Administration's pledge to remove all American troops from Iraq by the end of 2011 is encouraging - and in no small way likely attributable to resistance by our armed forces - it continues to fight in Afghanistan, and the military may soon have a heightened presence elsewhere in the Middle East and in Africa. As such, Rules of Disengagement provides inspiration and lessons for anyone who opposes an interventionist U.S. military policy.
In other times, they would never have met. They come from different corners of Israeli society, rooted in their own beliefs, busy with their own troubles. Farmers and fishermen, skeptics and believers, immigrants and natives, children and grandparents struggle with faith, loss, jealousy, hope?—?and the turmoil around them only deepens the rifts that divide them. But when the Israeli government orders all Jewish communities in the Gaza Strip destroyed, Neve Adva?—?the settlement some of them call home?—?becomes the unlikely crossroads where all their worlds collide and all their lives are changed forever. Daniella Levy’s magnificent, richly nuanced novel challenges us to step outside our bubbles and question everything we’ve believed about the Other. Disengagement is more than just the story of one fictional settlement. It’s about what it means to disengage?—?from home and surroundings, from friends, neighbors, and family, from opinions and deeply held beliefs. And it’s about how listening to one another and learning from unexpected encounters can help us become connected again.
Part dialogue, part debate between Howard Schneiderman and a small number of social theorists, Engagement and Disengagement represents the culmination of a life’s work in social theory. On the one hand, it is about cohesive social, cultural, and intellectual forces, such as authority, community, status, and the sacred, that tie us together, and on the other hand, about forces such as alienation, politics, and economic warfare that pull us apart. With a blend of humanism and social science, Engagement and Disengagement highlight this two-culture solution to understanding social and cultural history.
Social media is polarizing America: using Facebook causes Americans to negatively judge and stereotype those people with whom they disagree about politics.
"On January 6 we witnessed what many of us consider a failed insurrection at the US Capitol. But others think this was political violence in service of the preservation of our democracy. When did our political views become extreme? When did guns and violence become a feature of American politics? Nathan Kalmoe and Lily Mason have been researching the increase in radical partisanship in American politics and the associated increasing propensity to support or engage in violence through a series of surveys and survey experiments for several years. Kalmoe and Mason argue that many Americans have become increasingly radical in their identification with their political party and more inclined to view partisans of the other party negatively as people. Their reactions to opposing political views give little room for respect or compromise and make increasing numbers of Americans more likely to either participate in political violence or to view those who do so on behalf of their party favorably. They also find that radical partisans are more apt to be receptive to messages from radical political leaders and less receptive to conflicting information and views. Radical partisanship and political violence are not new to the United States. In most of the 20th century we experienced less radical partisanship, with measures of attitudes towards partisans of other parties that were not as extreme as we see now but this has not been the case throughout much of American history, as witness the fight over slavery that led to the Civil War as well as the violence associated with racism after the fall of reconstruction to the present day"--
Politics was once a term with an array of broadly positive connotations, associated with public scrutiny, deliberation and accountability. Yet today it is an increasingly dirty word, typically synonymous with duplicity, corruption, inefficiency and undue interference in matters both public and private. How has this come to pass? Why do we hate politics and politicians so much? How pervasive is the contemporary condition of political disaffection? And what is politics anyway? In this lively and original work, Colin Hay provides a series of innovative and provocative answers to these questions. He begins by tracing the origins and development of the current climate of political disenchantment across a broad range of established democracies. Far from revealing a rising tide of apathy, however, he shows that a significant proportion of those who have withdrawn from formal politics are engaged in other modes of political activity. He goes on to develop and defend a broad and inclusive conception of politics and the political that is far less formal, less state-centric and less narrowly governmental than in most conventional accounts. By demonstrating how our expectations of politics and the political realities we witness are shaped decisively by the assumptions about human nature that we project onto political actors, Hay provides a powerful and highly distinctive account of contemporary political disenchantment. Why We Hate Politics will be essential reading for all those troubled by the contemporary political condition of the established democracies.
This book examines young people's political engagement in the Anglo-American democracies. It is often alleged that young people are disengaged from politics on a number of levels. The commonly held view is that young people don't vote, they do not trust politicians and have low levels of political interest. But is this true, where is it true and to what extent? Examining voter turnout, political trust, political interest, electoral and non-electoral forms of participation and Internet use, this book provides a comprehensive account of young people's political engagement in the US, Britain, Canada and Australia. In doing so this book challenges the conventional wisdom on a number of fronts by showing young people's political engagement to be much more complicated than many of the stereotypes suggest (in both good and bad ways).In this way, this book provides a report card on young people's political engagement in the twenty-first century. Young People and Politics will be of interest to students and scholars of political science, comparative politics, public policy and sociology, particularly those with a focus on young people and politics, political participation and public opinion.