Nermin Aydemir JTW Columnist printable version send your friend message to author add comment ()

Friday, 9 January 2009

The economic theory of political participation appears to be right in its propositions. People take part as long as benefits overwhelm and tend to remain silent when they get less than they give.
 
 Putting preferred policies into practice can be seen as the greatest benefit of playing a part in the game of politics. This is why having a party preference is importance, especially when it comes to voting. A sense of efficacy is more likely when people have a party preference which covers their ideology, basic standpoints, general position in the life and the like. Politics goes beyond a remote and complicated activity thanks to the established party culture, programs, and political personalities. Not surprisingly, a sense of group solidarity develops when people collectively support an entity. All in all, a single vote, or any individual effort becomes much greater than a drop in the ocean.
 
 Like no activity in our lives is without costs, political participation bears its own expenses. Citizens need at least some level of political knowledge to get the feeling of supporting an entity in this field. One can not support the Tories more than the labors, if he or she does not know who they are. Although lacking such information may sound highly unthinkable to the readers of this article, such deficiencies are the greatest causes behind abstention among minority groups.
 
 It is harder for minorities to get the necessary political knowledge especially when they come short in language. Unlike from the native, minority people do not get the information per se but need to put extra effort to attend it. Native children grow by hearing the debates about different politicians within a society. Minority children, however, usually get access to such information at youth, only when those are told at school.
 
 Insufficient contact further worsens the case. Either refusing to participate in social life or lacking the necessary means for it, or in many cases due to both; immigrants fail to support politicians who actually work for them.
 
 No matter if we are aware or not, there are thousands of people, who do not know the name of the premier of the country they live in, let alone listing the political parties and being aware of their standpoints. It is tragicomic to hear immigrant youth giving the names of the extreme rightist politicians when they are asked to list the ministries in the cabinet. Shortcomings in language further hinder such participation, not only among the earliest generations but also among their children and grandchildren.
 
 (Despite having many contributions in many other spheres) satellites channels of the country of origin bring the situation from bad to worse. News coverage of those channels regrettably fails to bear the responsibility of informing people about what is happening in the world. The Internet, the endless source of information, did not bring a revolutionary change, either. Unlike TV, the Internet is not very powerful in capturing the interests on non-salient issues. Individuals only click the relevant websites when they are already interested.
 
 It is worth noting that the immigrant youth follows politics only when it comes to extreme happenings in this field, especially when they are involved as the objects of the debate. It is not surprising that the immigration youth knows more about far rightist policies than the parties that are much more open to embrace them. Likewise, minority people know more about the anti-immigrant policies than those who are supporting them. Lacking the general picture, people tend to generalize such extremist policies, politicians and happenings; which leads to a deep hostility and sense of political powerlessness.
 
 When all these are taken into consideration, it is not surprising to see that the immigrant youth involve in radical groups rather than taking place in politics to change things. Burning cars or exploiting cities seem to be the solution rather than voting for the pro-immigrant parties in the elections. A home-grown terrorism fear rightfully scares the multicultural societies of the contemporary era. Making these young people feel that they are able to change things when they work for seems to be the key in this solution
 
 Proper knowledge appears to have utmost importance in this context. Finding the accurate ways for doing this, however, is not less important than the knowledge itself. Schools in general and civic classes in particular, are quite often the only sources of political information. A wiser education policy is capable of creating wonders in this regard. Special attention can be paid on the immigrant youth, who are deficient of many other sources of political information. Additional courses might be functional for instance. Harmonizing the immigrant youth with the native carries particular importance in making the minority youth to participate in politics. More space needs to be given for discussions, triggering a dialogue within heterogonous groupings. For instance, giving group assignments, which include web search, can be quite functional. It goes without saying that the ‘black’ schools, isolating the minority youth from the culture and language of the society of settlement kill such learning.
 
 Of course, schools are not the only agents within society. A wide range of initiatives need to be taken to make the family, friends, media and the like be more capable of informing the youth. These will be dealt with in the later articles in this column.
 
 10 October 2007