Citizenship in Britain: Values, Participation and Democracy

The idea that of citizenship is at the moment the point of interest of debate through the media, politicians and teachers, as a result of a mostly perceived progress in public disaffection and apathy. providing the 1st complete learn of British citizenship, this booklet is produced from surveys of political participation and voluntary actions, in addition to the ideals and values which help them. The authors supply a cosmopolitan dialogue of the concept that of citizenship, and the results of a scarcity of civic engagement in a latest democracy.

Show description

Quick preview of Citizenship in Britain: Values, Participation and Democracy PDF

Best Political Theory books

From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology

An creation to the paintings of the best German sociologist and a key determine within the improvement of present-day sociological notion.

Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and Government [Oxford Political Theory Series]

This is often the 1st full-length presentation of a republican replacement to the liberal and communitarian theories that experience ruled political philosophy lately. the most recent addition to the acclaimed Oxford Political conception sequence, Pettit's eloquent and compelling account opens with an exam of the conventional republican perception of freedom as non-domination, contrasting this with validated unfavourable and optimistic perspectives of liberty.

Traveling Back: Toward a Global Political Theory

We are living in a world age, an age of gigantic scale and velocity, an age of serious technological and fiscal and environmental switch, in stipulations our ancestors may well rarely have imagined. What does this compression of geographical and temporal scale suggest for our political pondering? can we want new modes of political inspiration or a brand new form of political mind's eye?

Scales of Justice: Reimagining Political Space in a Globalizing World (New Directions in Critical Theory)

Until eventually lately, struggles for justice proceeded opposed to the heritage of a taken-for-granted body: the bounded territorial kingdom. With that "Westphalian" photo of political area assumed by means of default, the scope of justice was once not often topic to open dispute. this day, in spite of the fact that, human-rights activists and foreign feminists sign up for critics of structural adjustment and the realm exchange association in not easy the view that justice can merely be a household relation between fellow voters.

Additional info for Citizenship in Britain: Values, Participation and Democracy

Show sample text content

While requested no matter if environmental, animal liberation, non secular or neo-nazi and racist teams must have the proper to air their perspectives in public, quite few have been dedicated to unrestricted freedom of speech. desk 2. four studies uncomplicated plurality (47 according to cent) would certainly supply environmentalists the correct to talk out in public, yet fewer may supply that correct to animal liberationists, spiritual fundamentalists or neonazis and racists. a prior learn of political tolerance (Crewe, Conover and Searing, 1994) mentioned that the British have been illiberal of teams of individuals of whom they disapproved. Overwhelming majorities have been keen to forbid humans in such teams to educate in neighborhood faculties or to shape an area department of Civic ideals and Citizenship 39 desk 2. four Tolerance of the Rights of alternative teams to talk in Public Neo-nazi & racists non secular fundamentalists Animal liberationists Environmentalists certainly now not percent very likely no longer percent potentially definite percent certainly definite percent Don’t comprehend percent sixty four 34 14 6 eleven 23 thirteen five thirteen 27 forty five 38 eight 10 24 forty seven five 6 five four resource: Weighted 2000 face-to-face survey. N = 3,145. query: ‘To what volume may still the subsequent teams be allowed to talk out in public r neo-nazi and racist teams r non secular fundamentalists r animal liberation teams r environmental teams? ’ observe that during this desk and all those who stick to within which percent responses are recorded, the figures were rounded and consequently the totals would possibly not regularly equivalent a hundred. the gang. query wording transformations among this previous learn and the Citizen Audit make direct comparisons tough, yet our facts confirms people’s related constrained degrees of tolerance. within the Citizen Audit we requested our respondents whether or not they might tolerate specific teams dwelling of their group. desk 2. five finds that the NIMBY (Not In My again backyard) issue is particularly robust. round one-half or extra of our respondents adverse a resettlement domestic for younger offenders, a brand new age guests’ camp, or a intercourse offenders’ rehabilitation centre of their neighbourhood. delight in British citizenship and democracy relocating now from questions touching on person tolerance into problems with delight ordinarily, we begin by means of asking how proud everyone is to be British electorate. Over three-quarters of our respondents expressed a satisfaction of their British citizenship. determine 2. four indicates that 33 in keeping with cent have been ‘very proud’, and yet another forty eight in step with cent have been ‘somewhat proud’; in contrast, just one in 33 (3 in line with cent) felt no satisfaction whatever, and a complete of sixteen according to cent had destructive emotions. individuals are proud to be British electorate, yet they're a ways much less passionate about British democracy. while requested how happy they're with the way in which democracy works in Britain we discover remarkably that just about as many of us show dissatisfaction as delight. In determine 2. five, we see 40 knowing Citizenship desk 2. five Tolerance of the Rights of alternative teams of individuals to be Housed in the neighborhood New tuition Retirement domestic younger offenders’ resettlement domestic New age guests’ camp intercourse offenders’ unit help percent Neither help nor oppose percent Oppose percent Strongly oppose percent Don’t recognize percent 25 21 three fifty three fifty seven 25 thirteen 14 22 five five 25 1 1 22 three 2 four 1 10 14 28 forty five 2 1 6 eleven 23 fifty seven three Strongly aid percent resource: Weighted 2000 face-to-face survey.

Download PDF sample

Rated 4.40 of 5 – based on 50 votes