Since the events of 9/11 and the controversial war in Iraq the American people have come to the realization that politics, especially on the nation level can no longer be ignored. As important events force these issues into our lives we in turn are compelled to discuss them. Therein hides a problem. How many times have you tried to have an intelligent political conversation with a friend, fellow worker or family member only to discover that two of you are talking on completely different levels? What starts off as a well intended interaction quickly devolves into a struggle to avoid insult or seriously offend. As a way to calculate where you and yours stand, the following are general definitions for the five levels of political awareness.
1. Illiterate – A person who is politically illiterate might know who the President is or perhaps the Governor of their state but that’s usually about it. They don’t watch the news. They have no knowledge of the issues and don’t know the difference between a Republican and a Democrat. This person does not vote.
2. Misinformed – This category is for those who have latched onto an extreme sect, an emotional issue, a movement or a charismatic personality. They are often dogmatic about their views and prefer partisan rancor because they would lose an objective debate. They often know little if anything about other perspectives. They have a slow growing awareness of officials but are primarily focused on those they dislike. While this person might be passionate and loud about their views, they are also often hypocritical when it comes to the practice of these views. Politics is a character crutch for them. So in turn this person will usually claim to vote but often does not.
3. General – This is probably where most Americans reside. A general awareness is as the name implies. This person knows who some of the government officials are, they know some of the issues and can tell the difference between a Republican and a Democrat. They might be strongly motivated on one or two issues. They might pick their candidates based on personal appeal rather than party affiliation. They lean towards stability, moderation and bipartisan movements. This person votes in almost every general election.
Article comments
1 - offendedblogger
Excellent article. I hope you don't mind my linking it to my blog.
My only suggestion - you need to add a #6 for people like me who simply blog about all the offenders and offenses. :)
Chelle B.
2 - Jacob
1. Illiterate - This person does not vote.
2. Misinformed - This person will usually claim to vote but often does not.
3. General - This person knows the difference between a Republican and a Democrat but doesn’t care... too busy watching stock car races and Britney Spears
4. Activist - This person will vote the same way as the last time whether it was as a Republican or as a Democrat.
5. Expert - This person has a good grasp of the issues. This person will vote for Ron Paul.
3 - anonymous
This article is made with fail. It assumes politics is only about compromise and power players, the fact is history is made by the senseless rabble not the aristocrats.
4 - Dave Nalle
I'd argue that your #2 actually falls outside of the hierarchy that the other 4 form and that you can be misinformed or downright nutty, like Jacob and still be aware of political events. The thing is that you may know a lot or think you do, but actually understand nothing.
Dave
5 - Jacob
"The thing is that you may know a lot or think you do, but actually understand nothing."
-- Dave Nalle
Excellent self-analyis!
6 - Don't blame me, I voted.
Great article. America could abandon individual voting systems altogether and go to a lottery style system. That way there can be no blame on failed policy or misdirection. We can chalk it up to fate.
7 - khanj42
I've had FAR too many discussions with those on the second tier. Not that anyone ON that tier would admit to being there...you'd just get more rancor.
Where do journalists fall? Good ones, I mean.
8 - David B.
Bad article. Understanding and participation are not necessarily linked, and you ought not to assume otherwise. There are plenty of people who know the issues, but dislike politics, dislike the 2-party system, whatever it is, and thus do not participate.
9 - alessandro
I've met many stupid activists and smart generalists.
One can know politics without knowing the "issues" and still exhibit wisdom.
Not into the micro-management of politics. I like to read and assess the big picture. I often don't know the issues and to be honest I don't care nor do I read the papers.
I still have a better grasp of politics and history than most. I can be introduced to an issue and make sense of it if I have to. Bogging down with the issues can lead to paralysis by analysis and this leads to brain-dead partisan garbage.
10 - alessandro
I forgot to add: sometimes talking to a person who knows the issues doesn't necessarily translate into an enlightened conversation.
It's similar to sports. The person who knows the stats but little of anything else is not well-rounded enough to have a heavy sports discussion. Conversely, the person who has deep knowledge but little interest in stats short changes himself in terms of knowledge. And the loud-mouth'd shnook who thinks he's funny is just plain boring.
Balance people. BALANCE!
11 - Jonathan Scanlan
This article is flawed because it is simply too reductionist.
Individuals vary in at least 2 dimensions:
1. Media Consumption - How well read they are, both in general and across the spectrum.
2. Detailed Reading - Their capacity to think critically and read issues more deeply than us versus them.
Just because a person is high in one, does not mean they are high in the other, but then who is more politically aware?
12 - kevin
good article, i think its a good generalization of really how america is in regard to its voters. I thought i would be at the bottom but i after reading it, i feel that i am a generalist.
13 - Jared Wright
So... Different people understand and partake in the interaction of politics at varying levels. It was articulated well enough, but was there supposed to be some greater point here? You could more or less rewrite this article substituting the appropriate terminology for many topics: sports, music, books, technology... As far as the broad categorizations themselves, seems like the slope steepens sharply after #3.
14 - Zedd
I am not sure why ones interest has to fit into one of these categories. Also politics is not static. One has varying points of interest at various times in their lives. One may not have the demeanor to be an activist. One may understand the language of diplomacy but may not have an interest in working on any-one's campaign.
I don't get the list. Is this a universal law?
15 - Maurice
I have to point out that there is no category for those that are students of the Founding Fathers. It is my belief that the intentions of the FF should be understood and applied to modern society.
"[T]he powers of the federal government are enumerated; it can only operate in certain cases; it has legislative powers on defined and limited objects, beyond which it cannot extend its
jurisdiction."
-- James Madison, Speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention [June 6, 1788]
Powerful and moving words that have been forgotten.
16 - bliffle
What purpose do you intend with these categories?
Most people want what you try to take away in your final paragraph: demeaning comparisons to subdue opposition.
17 - Maurice
Indulge me in this quote also:
Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government.
James Madison
Makes me wonder how he knew...?
18 - moolah mattatah
i like what you say. you may want to consider that most of us lack the power of self-awareness and could be at any level of you chart and not know it. you may want to include some clever way for people to be able to have a hope of defining themselves and then suggestions on how to attain the next level (maybe run an on-line course). also in the general category you need to include people who are afraid to communicate their opinions either because of fear of looking bad or in the name of non-intervention.
19 - Rainonlevs
I think that the article noted some useful ideas like the difference between subject and political knowledge, but trying to put everything into a single hierarchical measure marginalizes most of them.
I think it would be more useful to chart on two or three axis for level of information on an issue, amount of action on an issue and perhaps the power/connections that person has.
(Each of these axis could also incorporate negative values for disinformation, actions that dissuade others from acting, and the kinds of political connections that make it more difficult for other political actors by association.)
20 - Jet in Columbus
A poll for who you'd vote for as President is being run on BCs Forum page. To add your voice click here