Political Participation Issue

Even after the passing of the Fifteenth Amendment, African Americans were “disenfranchised in the South by intimidation and electoral trickery, including whites-only primaries, rigged literacy tests, and poll taxes” (Patterson 2011, p. 180). The Freedom Riders rode through the South, enduring harassment and imprisonment to encourage other African Americans to vote. Voter turnout in African American communities is greatly encouraged. Personally, coming from an African American family, I was strongly encouraged by my parents and grandparents to vote when I was of legal age. My family instilled the importance of voting in me at a very young age. Although voter turnout among African Americans is still fairly low, in the 2008 presidential election African Americans had the second highest voter turnout, behind non-Hispanic Caucasians (African Americans, n.d.). Race can influence voter turnout because with African Americans specifically, although rates are getting better, they are still not high.

In the early years of the United States, voting laws were very strict and only a select few people were able to vote. In 1776, only people who owned land were permitted to vote. Most people in this category were white males over the age of 21. This continued for many decades: in 1790 the Naturalization Law passed. It explicitly stated that only “free white” immigrants can become naturalized citizens. This gave only free white people the right to vote- very little progress was being made.

Indeed, gender and racial differences in participation in U.S. democracy have long been noted. For example, African Americans report feeling disengaged from the political process and frequently believe that their civic activities make little to no difference to their

White males over the age of 21 were the first to be able to participate in American democracy. Besides some taxpaying or property owning laws, the majority of all working class white males were eligible to vote

Verba and his co-authors examine the import of participation, both voting and non-voting, in our American society. According to their argument, the typical citizen activist “tend[s] to be drawn disproportionately from more advantaged groups–to be well-educated and well-heeled and to be White and male” (Verba et al., 1995: 231). Indeed, Verba et al. explore participation along both gender and racial lines and concludes that both women and minorities are comparatively less active than men, especially white men, who stand peerless both in terms of affiliation with a political organization, contributing to a campaign, contacting their Representatives, and more direct forms of participation like voting.

Additionally to television, many political figures including Barrack Obama use social networking as a way to reach American citizens. Social networking is practically a right of passage among youth today. Political influences are in all types of media. Any young person that uses social networking or watches television is choosing to not pay attention to politics. “It would be reading too much into such responses to say that these two-thirds of young Americans didn’t value voting; they could well have seen voting as a fundamental right or a crucial choice. Nevertheless, without a

In his essay, “Changing the Face(book) of Social Activism”, Mark Pfeifle writes about the role social media has played socially and politically in our world. In his time, Mark Pfeife has served as a top national security advisor, communicator and deputy assistant for George W. Bush. Pfeife has come to the conclusion that social media has redefined social activism - in place, calling it “social slacktivism”. The word “slacktivism” is a conjuring of his views and biases. Pfeife believes this describes the populace as taking action over the internet without doing anything physically to change things. An example that Pfeife brings up is during the presidential election of 2008, Barack Obama’s campaign was promoted all over online, sources like

This encourages the formation of several parties to represent specific interests and generally, the wider the selection, the higher the turnout rate (Edwards, Wattenber, and Lineberry 208). For example, the American presidential election of 1992, when Ross Perot ran as the candidate for the Reform Party, turnout levels increased (Teixeira 149).

Since urban areas, and subsequently urban high schools, have a high population of low-income residents, it is important to explore how this aspect of their social status has affected these individuals historically. According to Mantsios (2006) a majority of the United States (60 percent) hold less than 6 percent of the wealth. What is more, one in eight people live below the federal poverty level Mantsios (2006). This is important, because class level is strongly correlated with educational outcomes and success, which can be explained by class domination Mantsios (2006). Essentially, people who are born into wealthy families versus poor families have more opportunities provided to them on the basis of their class status or familial connections Mantsios (2006). Take for instance the example Schmidt (2007) given of white students with mediocre grades getting into Ivy League

When voting in America first took only White man adults who own property and has lived in the country for a year or more. Than, later states began to allow all white man adults to vote but only White Males. Over time however, slowly, one by one states began to let woman vote but even then only certain women. Though, it wasn’t long till all woman got the right to vote! It was an even longer rougher road for those of other races for the votes to be

In this essay, I would like to discuss the major obstacles to voting, recent changes to overcome voting barriers and the political influence of changed rules. Low turnout in the U.S. reflects that there are obstacles for people to voting and changes to overcome these obstacles may also bring new problems to different social groups. I will elaborate on these aspects in the following parts.

Socioeconomic status is a term used to weigh up a person’s/family social and economic standing. This status is determined by factors such as income, education, occupation and social environment (Leary, 2007). A person’s socioeconomic status can fluctuate over time depending on the person improving their life choices or by making poor life choices.

Over the years the media has made citizens major role players in politics. Ross Perot opened eyes by putting the 1992 Election in the media and thereby allowing voters to become directly involved in politics. The Internet, the new form of mass media “has turned into a major political and media industry” (Grossman 16). Because of the rise the Internet has taken, the idea of direct democracy has risen. The foundation of direct democracy is in self-government. The claim is that the presence of the Internet will increase citizens’ involvement in political issues by allowing them access to more information. This is significant because it takes a look at the impact of technology on society and politics, as well by

Socio-economic class is reflective of occupation and education, combined with wealth and income to position one relative to others in society. These factors play a significant role in shaping someone's life chances and choices. Social class has much to do with who we are today. For example, access to jobs and education is often determined through the categories of social location and identity. White, middle-class/wealthy, men and women, statistically speaking, are given more access to college entrance and corporate executive employment than to any other persons of any

As a logical consequence, Postmes and Brunsting (2002) reasoned that the Internet is changing society because people's cognitive processes, triggered by access to information and communication, replace the strong social ties that traditionally underpin committed activism. In simpler words, in the past, humanity used the herd instinct as the main driving force behind committed forms of activism. Thanks to the Internet, we climb another step or three on the evolutionary ladder, and simply do away with the herd instinct and replace it with reason. The argument, if put this way, does not sound particularly strong. What can be taken away is that social media is still evolving, that social media changes the way we – or most of us communicate, that social media is used in social and political activism, and that the Internet increases quantitative if not qualitative access to information.