Arguement Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Arguement - Essay ExampleSchier argues that this passivity among many citizens is due to change of politics from mobilization, as a method of winning power, support and control, to activation (7). Skocpol, on the other hand, explains the phenomenon in terms of change of American associational life (7-8). But a critical analysis and review of the two theories reveals that Schiers theory is more plausible, era Skocpols theory is weak, untenable and highly flawed. To better expose the many flaws in Skocpols theory, let us first air in detail the dissentent positions held by the two scholars. To begin with, let us look at the theory of Schier. Schier begins his argument by making a distinction between the terms mobilization, and activation. He defines mobilization as the partisan method of touch very high turnout in elections during the peak party power that lasted from 1876-1892 (7). In contrast, he defines activation as, the more contemporaneous method that parties, interest gro ups, and candidates affiance to induce particular, finely targeted portions of public to become active in elections, demonstrations, and lobbying (7). Schier goes on to show in detail how these two processes of winning power and control differ (8-9). First, the two processes differ in focus, whereby mobilization is inclusive while activation is exclusive and for a select few. Secondly, the two processes differ in agent or source of stimulation of the public, while mobilization was a heavily partisan process, dominated by strong party organizations and party messages, in activation thousands of distinct organisation and individuals attempt activation. Thirdly, the two processes differ in method. Mobilization involved broad appeals carried out through personal conversation, while activation is research driven and targets particular individuals. Lastly, the processes differ in their strategy, mobilization seeks to mobilise as many people as possible to help the given candidate to wi n elections, while activation targets just a small, well-informed segment of the society to advance a certain goal, for example to help in polls. As it can be seen from the above explanation, activation alienates some people, as it were, from the active politics, since it aims only at a particular, few members of the society while leaving out the vast bulk of the society. This exclusion of some members, more often than not, survives to the inactivated and excluded members of society becoming inactive and passive in politics. Skocpol, on the other hand, understood the cause of the increasing radioactive decay in active participation in national politics by the Americans, as the result of decline in American associational life. In the contemporary America, exclusive elite, and professionally managed organisations have replaced the former organisations of the last few decades which had open membership to all citizens, irrespective of ones social class. The emergence of modern moveme nts in America played a big role in the change of associational life in America. Skocpols theory hinges on two main claims. First, she holds that in American society, social organisations and politics are closely related, such that change in associational life of the society would invariably lead to change in civic life. She goes on to argue that, over the last few decades, American social life has greatly changed, and this has led to the change in American social civic life (6). Unlike in