Just finished reading Sidney Verba’s comments on equality of political participation for class (if you’re wondering which one, note the categories). Anyway, I have comments on both the content and the writing in the article:
First, the writing: I felt that Verba posed the question well at the beginning, but framed the question in a way that favored the opposite of his conclusion. Also, I felt that he (I’m assuming that Sidney Verba is a man, but please correct me if I’m wrong by posting a comment) did a lot of listing, but not much evaluating. Thus, when in the conclusion he asserts that the drawbacks to equal participation are more than counterbalanced by the values of equality, I don’t see where he’s drawing the value judgment from. Most of the article just listed consequences, and then the value of those consequences is assigned, added, compared and stated without an explanation.
Second, the content: I think it’s more important to distinguish two questions (I had a hard time telling if Verba did this, my guess is he did, but I don’t remember reading it). The first question is whether participation is at the same level across various groups. This is important to ask, but I don’t feel it’s as important as wondering (the second question) whether various groups have the same box of tools on which they can call to participate (ie, are some groups limited from various forms of participation because they have to work so many hours they can’t attend political meetings, or because they can’t afford to contribute to campaigns, or because they don’t have enough time to volunteer on a campaign, etc.).
Verba comes close to addressing the distinction when he writes on page 4 for point number 4 that “The former situation is a greater violation of democratic values than the latter,” the former referring to a lack of participation due to a lack of resources and the latter refers to the cause’s being a lack of interest.
I’m not clear on whether the latter is even a violation of democratic values. It certainly doesn’t seem one on society’s part. As far as I’m concerned, society’s responsibility is to provide the same toolkit to everybody, to make sure the former sort of non-participation is nonexistent. Moreover, I feel society’s role stops there. If there is a violation of democratic values in the latter case is it is by the citizen who is not politically active, not society.
Soon after (page 6), Verba writes, “The function of political equality among citizens is the fundamental equality of human beings. For some earlier thinkers, this equality rests on ….” WRONG! It doesn’t rest on anything. We hold it to be self-evident!
In the discussion on educated particpators, I felt that Verba was placing too many burdens on citizens. The truth is that any system will follow roughly an 80/20 rule. 20% of a jeweler’s customers will bring him 80% of his business. Maybe the jeweler should (as Seth Godin would suggest) get rid of the other 80% of his clientele so he can focus on getting more work out of the 80, but that only works on a micro scale. Anything that involves a macro scale (such as government) as to allow for different levels of customer activity.
On a fact question, at the very end of page 6, Verba refers to the fact that high school graduates contribute on average $15, those with some college contribute on average $53, and those with a college degree an average of $186. What’s the overall average? What’s the average of CEOs? I’d be interested in seeing how these numbers are derived. They apparently come from Verba 1995, Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Orbis indicates that there are four copies in the library, all renewed or on reserve. I wonder who has them.
I feel that Verba missed a point when he discusses the education issue. Perhaps educated citizens are more focused on more communal or national issues (rather than personal ones), but this ignores a few problems: personal issues are important for government to be aware of, and address. Secondly (and more importantly) political action is not only directed at decision-makers, but also the other people who are politically active. People don’t write letters to the editor just because a legislator reads that paper. They write that letter to persuade the readership of that paper as well.
Lastly, I didn’t understand the business about the CVM process.
0 Responses to “Comments on Verba reading”