Citizen beliefs include a range of opinions that help guide political actions and shape public policy. Some views amount to a clear consensus. A consensual political culture demonstrates that some values are shared among most of the population and that beliefs overlap. For example, nearly everyone agrees children should be educated and that the government should punish violent criminals. However, people might disagree on aspects related to those issues.

For example, exactly what topics should children learn? What is the appropriate punishment for premeditated murder? Political culture can also be conflictual when groups with opposing beliefs clash over key issues. Those key issues range from gay rights to U.S. foreign intervention.

Policymakers try to answer these questions in a society of diverse and constantly shifting views. The framers built processes into the Constitution so that different interpretations of the core values Americans share can be debated and shaped into policy that represents the divergent views of Americans. The most effective way to reach consensus on these issues is for citizens to debate their ideas in a civil and respectful way.

Core Values and Attitudes

Citizens’ attitudes toward government and toward one another are influenced by the way they interpret core American values. American citizens, coming from a range of backgrounds and experiences, have widely different views of how government ought to govern. Even when citizens generally agree on a core value, they often disagree on how public officials should address it, how to define the terms of the debate, and how government should fund it. For example, most citizens believe that government should provide an economic safety net for citizens, some kind of welfare system that will help those who have lost their jobs, fallen to ill health, or found themselves without shelter.

Yet citizens differ greatly on what defines “poor,” at what point the government should help people, and what type of assistance government should give.

Similarly, nearly all Americans oppose murder and all want to correctly identify the killer before punishment is administered. However, we differ noticeably on how government might prosecute the accused and what punishment a guilty defendant will receive.

You’ll notice an “either or, or maybe even a linear spectrum, to the ideological views outlined above. (See Topic 4.7 for more about political ideologies.) Some citizens believe in having a strict threshold to qualify for welfare and longer prison sentences for convicted criminals. People at this end of the spectrum are usually known as conservative.

Conservatives typically believe in law and order and would choose to lean toward order even at the expense of some liberties. Conservatives believe in traditions and institutions. They favor a small government that provides fewer services over a large government that provides many. They tend to favor harsh punishments for lawbreakers. Often, change comes slowly for a conservative.

Although conservatives may favor government support for people who are very poor, other groups of citizens may want government to provide welfare to people at a higher, though still impoverished, income level. These same people may desire leniency from the government on punishments for lawbreakers.

People at this other end of the spectrum are usually known as liberal.

Liberals are more likely to experiment with policy. They believe in law and order as well but are concerned about protecting the rights of the accused.

They are also accepting of higher taxes in exchange for more government services.

Governmental laws and policies balancing order and liberty are based on the U.S. Constitution and have been interpreted differently over time.

Relying on a linear scale to discuss citizens’ views oversimplifies the array of viewpoints that stretch across multiple dimensions, but the simple scale can be useful for discussion. No matter where on the scale people’s views might lie, people of the United States have embraced common views that form the country’s political culture- the set of attitudes that shape political behavior.

The cornerstones of political culture are individualism, equal opportunity, free enterprise, the rule of law, and limited government.

Individualism

From the days of self-reliant colonists and rugged settlers in the West to today’s competitive entrepreneurs, individualism-a belief in the fundamental worth and importance of the individual-has been a value of American social and political life. It is rooted in the Enlightenment philosophy that helped shape American government in which “inalienable rights” of individuals precede government-they are not bestowed by government. Individual liberties are enshrined in and protected by the Bill of Rights. Individualism is the value that encourages people to pursue their own best interest.

Different interpretations of individualism create a spectrum of views between self-centered individualism, which places the individual’s interest above the group’s interest and wants little interference from the government, to enlightened self-interest, which sacrifices some individual freedom for the greater good and expects the government to help promote the public good.

American individualism and self-reliance seek the freedom to fulfill one’s own promise while enjoying the benefits and protections of living in society.

Individualism, however, can be in tension with other social values Americans share, such as respect for the common good and protection of the public interest. Alexis de Tocqueville, the Frenchman who toured America in the 1830s making observations and later cataloguing them in his book, Democracy in America, warned about the dangers of individualism. He wrote that individualism “disposes each citizen to isolate himself from the mass of his fellows and withdraw into the circle of family and friends.” If everyone sought only his or her best interest, society as a whole would become fractured.

Equality of Opportunity

Thomas Jefferson included the line “all men are created equal” in the Declaration of Independence. The purpose of the line was not to suggest that every person was an absolute equal to every other in ability or character or any other subjective measure. Rather, the purpose of the line was to emphasize the equal rights of people to pursue life, liberty, and happiness. Yet, not until the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868 was there a national constitutional demand for state governments to guarantee the equal protection of citizens. In the Progressive Era (1890-1920), as government began to protect citizens from the harmful effects of industrialization and unfair business practices, President Theodore Roosevelt spoke of practical equality for all and declared, “(E]very man will have a fair chance to make of himself all that in him lies; to reach the highest point to which his capacities … can carry him.” He also pointed out the practical result that would enhance our nation, “[E]quality of opportunity means that the commonwealth will get from every citizen the highest service of which he is capable.”

The equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees that people in similar conditions in every state will be treated equally under the law.

Unequal treatment was not limited to the states. The federal government also had discriminatory practices. Over time, the federal government has provided remedies to redress these as well as state laws that resulted in unequal treatment.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, for example, prohibits employment discrimination based on race, sex, national origin, color, and religion. In 1965, Congress created an agency to combat discrimination in the hiring or firing of employees, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The EEOC investigates complaints of discrimination in job termination or refusal to hire based on race, sex, and other Title VII criteria.

Citizens argue the practical side of equality of opportunity by pointing to the efforts of an individual that lead to success. Others will agree that the occasional rags-to-riches story is impressive but not always possible without some level of government support for advancement. Still others claim that it is appropriate for the government to step in and, by law and policy, influence the natural forces of society and the market. Despite these different viewpoints, nearly all agree that equality of opportunity is a shared value.

Free Enterprise

Most Europeans came to North America for economic reasons: jobs, opportunity, or distance from a government that might inhibit economic success. In 1776, the same year the colonists declared independence, Scottish economist and philosopher Adam Smith wrote The Wealth of Nations, an examination of government’s role in the economy. Smith claimed that the state (meaning government in general) should be primarily concerned with protecting its people from invasion and with maintaining law and order and should intervene in the natural flow of human economic interaction only to protect the people. Businesses and merchants would succeed or fail based on their decisions and decisions of the consumer. Government should take a laissez-faire (“let it be”) approach. An “invisible hand, guided by the interactions of producers and consumers, would regulate the economy over time. This approach is called free enterprise and those who adhere to this approach are known as free-market advocates.

Smith would no doubt take issue with today’s government-required overtime pay and limits on factory emissions. Times have changed. Today even most strict free-market advocates believe in a minimum wage and some controls to keep clean the air we breathe.

Conservatives tend to want government to stay out of the way and want fewer burdensome regulations on businesses. For these reasons, small businesses owners and corporate leaders tend to vote with the Republican Party. Republican President Donald Trump issued a number of executive orders rolling back regulation on business, and in 2017, the Republican-dominated Congress passed a tax bill that greatly reduced corporate taxes.

In contrast, liberals tend to see government regulation as necessary to assure fairness and safety, and labor union leaders and hourly workers tend to side with the Democratic Party. The Republican-backed tax law of 2017 passed without support from any member of the Democratic Party.

Rule of Law

Every four years, the newly elected (or reelected) president is required to make the following promise before taking office: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” In fact, it is the Constitution itself that spells out this requirement in Article II, Section 1, Clause 8. This oath assures that even the president, the highest office holder in the land, must obey and protect the laws of the nation.

Rule of law-the principle of a government that establishes laws that apply equally to all members of society and prevents the rule and whims of leaders who see themselves as above the law-was a cornerstone of Enlightenment political thought. John Adams cited Enlightenment philosophers when pointing to the British injustices leading to the Revolution: “They [the philosophers] define a republic to be a government of laws, and not of men.”

The rule of law assures stability and certainty. In many foreign governments today, whatever dictator happens to be in charge will make most decisions in the government, regardless of prior policy, including when and even if there will be elections. In contrast, the U.S. Constitution dictates a presidential election every four years under the rule of law, and the United States has never missed an election, nor has it had a serious problem with the transfer of power.

At times, however, government officials disregard the rule of law for personal gain, corruption, or power. Fortunately, there are systems in place to address or reverse such disregard. Public records of government spending, regular auditing of the public purse, independent law enforcement, a free press, whistleblower protections, and public opinion all preserve the rule of law.

Sometimes the law is not followed for the sake of leniency. A traffic cop might let a young motorist go without a speeding ticket because the infraction was small. A president might provide a new interpretation for how the government treats immigrants. Our laws are written in language that has evolving meaning.

Separation of powers allows each branch of government some discretion in enforcing or interpreting laws.

Limited Government

American individuality and the story of the nation’s creation after a battle with an over-reaching government have ingrained in citizens a desire for limited government -one kept under control by law and by checks and balances and the separation of powers. The Constitution is filled with as many devices and designs to prevent government action as to empower it. The Bill of Rights is a list of rights, but also a list of what government cannot do. Citizens of all political viewpoints agree that none should suffer from the heavy hand of government.

Both parties have embraced the idea of a limited government. For nearly a century, the Democrats represented the party of limited government with a largely conservative approach to government. After a transformation through the Progressive Era (1890-1920) and the New Deal (1932-1937), the Democrats fully embraced liberal government action for the greater good with President Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society (1964-1965). Republicans were once the party that used the federal government to free enslaved people, to build railroads, and to create state colleges transformed during various eras in the nation’s history also. Republicans came to desire less government involvement in business, strong lines defining federalism, and a blindness to assure equality in hiring and college admissions.

Limited government is key to civil liberties, another arena in which public opinion is divided. Limited government is at issue when people grapple with such questions as “When can government come into your home? When can it regulate affairs related to church and morality?” among others.

What factors caused you, or anyone, to think about politics and policy

in particular ways? Attending college, getting married, purchasing a home, and having children can have an enormous impact on one’s thinking. Even career politicians whose political positions are well known can switch views in response to an evolving world, changing life experiences, and competing for voter support in an election. Every constituent and political participant is affected by many influences that shape their political development.

Cultural Factors, Political Socialization, and Attitudes If you try to pinpoint yourself with an X on the ideological spectrum shown on page 446, where would you fall? Would you be on the continuum at all, or would you identify with one of the other ideologies you read about? How did you arrive at that point on the continuum? The process by which you develop political beliefs, political socialization, begins as soon as you are old enough to start forming opinions on public matters, and it never really ends.

Family

Family has long been regarded as the biggest influence on political socialization.

As children begin to inquire about world events or local issues, parents share opinions that will likely influence their children. At the dinner table, families discuss “kitchen table politics, considering events currently happening and what impact they might have on the family.

The children’s magazine Weekly Reader conducted an unscientific poll on presidential elections from 1956 through 2008. Critics might dismiss such a poll of young, nonvoters as a joke. Yet, responding children generally answered as one or both of their parents would have, and thus the nationwide sample became reflective of the parent population at large. Only one time in its history did the Weekly Reader presidential poll fail to accurately predict the outcome.

Children can also differ from their parents in political opinions as do the parents between themselves. Younger people have less consistent views than older people. People aged 18-24 are frequently aligned with their parents. A 2005 Gallup study found that 71% of teens had a political ideology similar to their parents.

Yet, new research has discovered a higher percentage of children don’t follow their parents’ political party affiliation. “Children” include people aged 18 to 82, so the research looks at lifelong parental influence on political beliefs. The body of work from The British Journal of Political Science and American Sociological Review made several findings. In homes where politics is intensely discussed, values may immediately transfer from parent to child.

However, those discussions also model for the child how to discuss politics into adulthood, which exposes them to varied views and information that can cause ideological shifts. Increased access to information and resources has reduced relative parental influence. And, roughly one-third of children misperceived their parents affiliation or values anyway, which calls parental political influence into question.

These studies are worth further examination, and associated trends may continue, but for now, family is still likely the most significant influence in political socialization.

School and College

Both teachers and peer groups can have a large impact on student beliefs. In school, topics come up in classes that may allow a teacher to influence students politically, intentionally or not. There is no solid evidence that the K-12 experience makes one more conservative or liberal.

College campuses are places where professional scholars and students can discuss new ideas and explore revolutionary theories. College classrooms have more flexible rules than high school classrooms. College deans and professors encourage a free flow of ideas in classroom discussion. Nonetheless, business, economics, and engineering majors tend to be Republicans while students majoring in English and humanities tend to be Democrats.

Fewer high school graduates attended college from the 1950s to the early 1980s than today’s high school graduates. In fact, in 1968 only about 13 percent of Americans had a four-year college degree. In 2012, more than 33 percent of Americans aged 24-29 had attended college and earned a degree. Because such large numbers of people attend college and because so many post-college forces influence one’s beliefs, how the undergraduate experiences tilts voters is difficult to determine precisely.

Graduate school, however, is a different story. When researchers examine voters with advanced degrees-people with master’s and doctoral degrees-they find they more frequently vote Democratic and hold more liberal attitudes.

The highest percentage of people with advanced degrees (46.1%) consider themselves moderate, according to a 2007 study by academics Neil Gross and Solon Simmons.

Peers

Political scientists and sociologists have long looked at the relationships of peers and how they might influence an individual’s political beliefs and voting.

Social conformity is no doubt a factor in influencing individuals’ thinking, as people want acceptance by others in the group. Elizabeth Suhay of Lafayette College posits an explanation regarding political conformity in that “self-conscious emotions encourage individuals to adopt the norms of groups with which they closely identify.”

Betsy Sinclair, author of The Social Citizen, finds that peer pressure works to activate civic action or participation at the polls. A nonvoter living with a voter will feel pressure to cast a ballot. She also finds that group campaign fundraisers—potential donors gathered to meet and hear a candidate—turn out higher amounts of donations because there’s a sense of social obligation to contribute.

Media

As forms of media have spread to so many aspects of daily life, the media have a significant influence on political socialization. In fact, young people spend so much time in front of a screen—on their computers, phones, and other digital devices—that they spend less time with their family members, and for this reason the influence of the family on political socialization may be weakening somewhat. Young people are exposed to a great deal of political information and opinion through their exposure to media. Engaging with that content helps young people form their political identity. They follow politicians they admire and join groups that plan citizen events. As in face-to-face experiences, peer influence is strong in social media, and through online discussions with friends and family, young people develop their viewpoints.

Media are also influential in political socialization because of the way they depict politics and politicians through both news coverage and fictional television shows that are politically oriented. Even nonpolitical figures in the media—fictional characters with a strong sense of individualism, for example, or real-life people whose acts of bravery or self-sacrifice (or cowardice and greed, on the other side of the coin)—both reflect and help shape political and social views.

Social Environments

A person’s social environments beyond family and schools also influence political socialization. Two types of environments are especially important: religious institutions and civic institutions.

Religious Institutions

Churches and other places of worship influence individuals’ political thought. The National Election Study estimates that 33 percent of Americans attend church on a weekly or near-weekly basis.

Churches are more ideological and convey a more coherent philosophy than does a typical school. There are so many different churches, religions, and sects in this nation that there is no way to say how religion in general influences the average voter’s ideology. However, people who attend church are more likely to vote or participate in politics in other ways than those who don’t attend church.

Specific religious affiliations, though, can be directly tied to a political stance. Fundamentalists and Evangelical Christians have a strong political presence in the South and somewhat in the Midwest. Fundamentalists believe in a literal interpretation of the Holy Bible. Evangelicals promote the Christian faith. Both tend to take conservative positions and vote Republican. Catholics have traditionally voted with the Democratic Party, though their vote is less attached to Democratic candidates today than in earlier years because the demographics of Catholics have become so diverse. Jews make up a small part of the national electorate and tend to vote for Democrats.

Civic Institutions

If you are a Girl Scout, Boy Scout, an athlete on a neighborhood team, or a volunteer at a hospital, you are part of a civic institution. Civic institutions make up civil society—the nongovernmental, non-business, and voluntary sector of social life. Some civic institutions with extreme political views bring only like-minded people together, while other civic institutions bring together people from a variety of backgrounds and viewpoints and help them learn how to work around their differences. Both types influence political socialization: one reinforces already held beliefs while the other socializes a person to accept diversity.

Geography

Geographic location plays a key role in the way people think about certain issues. For example, for a century after the Civil War, the most identifiable Democratic region was the South. The party went through a long-term metamorphosis that shifted its strongest support away from southern states.

A close look at Electoral College results from a recent election will give you some indication where the two parties, and thus the two ideologies, are strong or weak. The candidate with the most votes in each state received the electoral votes for that state.

In the Northeast, liberal Democrats dominate and more liberal policies prevail. For example, higher tax rates fund more services, such as public transportation. Vermont and Massachusetts were among the first states to legalize civil unions and same-sex marriage. New York has followed. Democrats dominate the congressional delegations from New England, New York, and New Jersey. California and other western states also lean Democratic with liberal philosophies, having a strong concern for the environment and acceptance of diverse lifestyles.

The South is more influenced by conservative Christian values than are the Northeast and West. Southern states contain higher percentages of gun ownership than in other regions and are less friendly to organized labor. The South is more religious than other parts of the country. Church attendance is higher, and voters are decidedly more Protestant. Roughly 76 percent of the South is Protestant versus 49 percent for the remainder of the nation.

Southerners also have a high concern for issues related to farming and agriculture.

Republicans have enjoyed southern majorities in the last several national elections, but there are still many southern voters who remain Democrat, reflecting generations of party loyalty and the growth of southern cities. The working-class southerner may side with the Democratic Party on economic issues such as worker pay and employee benefits, but these same working-class voters want tighter immigration enforcement, and they tend to vote with traditional values in mind.

Globalization

The process of an ever-expanding and increasingly interactive world economy is known as globalization. The impact of globalization, though, goes beyond the economy. ‘The political culture of the United States has both influenced and been influenced by the values of other countries as a result of globalization.

U.S. Influence on Other Countries

The United States is the dominant economic power affecting globalization, with U.S. businesses and products spread throughout the world. For example, American film, television, commercials, streaming content, music, and video games are popular throughout the world. These products reflect American values, such as individualism and equality of opportunity, and consumers in foreign countries, even those with political cultures very different from that of the United States, can be influenced by these values. That influence may heighten tension between the American values and local values. For example, in countries where women do not have social or legal equality, American movies and television shows portraying women as equals clash with local values. In some places, that clash has led to the weakening of certain cultural values and the adoption of more Western values. In other cases, however, that clash has led to a strengthening of local cultures that do not want to see their cultural ideals become subsumed into a dominant world culture.

In general, however, U.S. influence in the world is seen as “democratizing” – promoting the principles of democracy. The more people in other countries are exposed to the United States’ political culture, the more they may wish to have a democratic political culture themselves.

Influence of Other Countries on the United States

Although most of the globalization influence flows from the United States to other countries, through globalization and encouraging immigration, the United States also is exposed to values from other parts of the world. The nation’s diversity has increased as a result of globalization. Professionals and other workers from all parts of the world bring their political and cultural ideas with them, and as they engage with American society, they exert influence. People from Asian countries, for example, tend to put the needs of the community above individual needs. For this reason, these cultures are called collectivistic, while the culture of the United States is called individualistic. Collectivistic values have had an influence on American culture, especially in the workplace, where collaboration, a collectivistic ideal, has been shown to lead to better results than those of individuals working in isolation.

Global Identification

Globalization has also created a political culture in which people think beyond national borders for their identity. For example, the European Union (EU) is a group of sovereign European nations that function as an economic and political unit, somewhat like the early confederation of states under the Articles of Confederation. Many people within the EU, while not abandoning their national identity, also feel a political and cultural kinship with other members of the Union.

The global reach of news coverage can also foster a sense of global citizenship. In 2019-2020, news coverage of forest fires in Australia engendered global support-volunteers and donations of money-from a sense of shared humanity. A number of international, non-governmental organizations, such as Doctors Without Borders, provide services wherever they are needed, many on a volunteer basis.

Pressures on the world’s resources, especially global warming, remind people that they share their fate with other people around the world and can promote a sense of global citizenship.