Unequal Political Participation

I found the following excerpt from "The Big Tilt" to be extremely interesting: "As long as inequalities in education and income persist, as long as Americans have unequal opportunities to develop and practice civil skills, and as long as citizens increasingly donate money rather than time to politics, the voices heard through the medium of citizen participation will be loud, clear, and far from equal" (H-24). It is evident in the readings assigned for tomorrow's class that education, money, and civic skills are all crucial elements of political participation. These factors almost singlehandedly determine an individual's ability to be heard within the political sphere, for better or for worse. Unfortunately, for a number of individuals, it seems the "for worse" prevails, as inequalities in education, money, and civic skills leave the minority out of the political picture. The minority, however, is actually the majority when it comes to the overall population. Politics is, for the most part, controlled by a number of individuals, all of whom are well-educated and extremely wealthy. Therefore, their voices are heard more often and more loudly than any other voices in politics due to their positions of power as defined by their wealth, among other things. However, these political elites, while they may represent the majority politically, are in the minority when it comes to the population as a whole due to their level of education and monetary status. The overall population is not being adequately represented as a result of such discrepancies.

For most individuals, there is almost always a direct correlation between wealth and education, thus the inequalities in educational opportunities represent a problem for political participation. If we are to become a more comprehensive, politically active citizenry, we need to address the issue of inequality in education. The gap between rich and poor, educated and un-educated, involved and uninvolved, etc. is only going to increase exponentially over time. However, the most effective approach may not be the most realistic. For example, putting more money towards education as opposed to defense may be the most obvious solution. However, it may not be entirely realistic given the way the budget has been allocated in the past. Therefore, we need not rely on education alone to solve the problem of political participation in America. Pateman outlines an interesting proposal, based on the idea that: "It is by participating at the local level that the individual 'learns democracy'" (31). Regardless of their occupation, citizens are exposed to democratic-like operations on a daily basis. "Therefore, for a democratic polity to exist it is necessary for a participatory society to exist, i.e. a society where all political systems have been democratised and socialisation through participation can take place in all areas" (43). Exposure to such a system should be the first step towards national political participation because if individuals are not participating on a local level, why would they care to participate at a national level where their voice is even less likely to be heard? Once they build up their confidence in the system at a local level, it may be enough to inspire them to join in at the national level. Education aside, confidence in both themselves and in the system is a vital prerequisite for political participation. Hopefully, given the right attitude and circumstances, individuals will then become motivated to exercise the full extent of their civil rights by educating themselves and those around them about the possibilities of participating in the political system. It is definitely a stretch, but increasing/expanding educational opportunities for millions of Americans is not going to happen over night. Therefore, in the meantime, a short-term solution is necessary so that the gap in inequality does not, at the very least, continue to increase at its current rate.