This essay presents a brief historical antecedent that allows us to formulate what the object of the Policy is so as to develop the approach to the problem of the socialization of the Policy.
For sophists, Politics was the art of being able to persuade through words. Persuading does not mean having the truth, but putting the word at the service of some interests and thus conceiving the laws as conventions that men adopted to live in society differently than animals do and where the strongest take advantage of the most weak.
Socrates, on the other hand, was concerned with the search for the end or purpose of man, in finding the object of the human being, which although Socrates did not define, in this essay, is to make it possible for man to live in society; or to say of Arent (1997) in the following quotes: "The Policy is based on the fact of the plurality of men…". “Politics is about being together and with one another of the diverse. Men organize themselves politically according to certain essential communities in absolute chaos, or out of absolute chaos of differences. In mediations that build political bodies on the family and understand them in the image of the family, it is considered that kinships can, on the one hand, unite the most diverse and, on the other, allow figures similar to individuals to distinguish themselves one of the others ”, p.45.
It turns out that it is the Policy that makes man's life possible in society, respecting the individuality and the differences that such individuality emerges, it is the agreement reached through the Policy and thanks to it the government of the society by the state.
The foregoing allows us to affirm that Politics must be placed within the so-called social sciences and that it deals with the study of relations between rulers and ruled, where the element of power is of special importance in the current times when “coercion develops for collective framing ”(Cruz 1994, p.12), as well as the notions of legitimacy and governability, which derive from consensus and acceptance around the ruler.
The power element, the governed-governed relations, do not have a life of their own, they arise from the participation of the associates, from the socialization that they make of the public, from the collective interests that are to guarantee the private interests.
Based on what has been said, the elaboration of a concept that expresses what can be understood by the socialization of Politics can be tried: a learning process through which the citizen interprets the expressions or symbols of the Policy, linking to the processes related to the public life.
The concept of political socialization can be taken in two senses, that of intervening in the centers of the government of a society and participating in decision-making. The other sense, to socialize the Policy individually or in a group but without pretending to influence the decision-making that is adopted in the centers of political power.
This type of Political socialization is what is commonly known, as Arzaluz S. (1999) says with the qualification of social, popular or community participation.
Political socialization is a social, collective act and is the product of a personal decision so it turns out to be the product of the influence of society on the individual and his will to influence society. Because it is an individual act, the socialization of the Policy does not occur in the same way in all people.
Political socialization is a social process that generates the interaction of different actors, be they collective or individual in defining their social destiny.
They are sources of political socialization, writes Jacqueline Peschard in “The Democratic Political Culture”: 1) the relationship between the roles that a person plays in society and in politics; and 2) the relationship between the experiences they have with the Policy.
When studying the socialization of Politics in light of the theory of reasoned action (Fishbein 1975), we find personality factors in political behaviors and social or environmental factors or influences, and factors that we can call circumstantial, that affect associates' political thinking. This complexity leads to different considerations regarding politics and the interest in socializing it.
The circumstances or situations that arise in the political environment play an important role in people's attitudes and beliefs in their cognitive processes. Hence, family, education, religion, for example, are potentials for the transmission of attitudes that influence the socialization of politics, so it is utopian to try to give a unique answer that explains the concept that man individual has on matters relating to public life and even more so, if such explanation does not have the support of a theory or psychological approach to know the motivations of the individual in the elaboration of the processes of socialization of politics.
DelVal (1999) brings an important contribution on the determinants of human development, explaining the reasons why people execute or refrain from executing certain behaviors, which are related to the issue of the socialization of politics. These determinants are "hereditary" and "environmental", understanding first the biological factor that is manifested by the traits, the dispositions of the person that are derived from hereditary factors, so many of the behaviors of the individual are similar to that of parents. Environmental determinism is explained as the influence of experience in the process of formation of the individual, being this product of the influence of the environment, this relationship with the cultural is a determining factor in the development of people.
According to Pizarro (1997), the need to contribute to the democratic formation of the individual from early childhood contributes to the strengthening of democracy and to social and political coexistence. It is clear from the foregoing that the willingness to socialize politics in individuals is mediated by the interventions of the family and the school in democratic practices, a circumstance that in the case of Colombia has begun to be taken into account in the school government, for example, with the choice of the personero in the educational institutions and the institutional educational project of each educational establishment of basic primary and secondary education.
The attitudes of affection and trust that are given to the child are very important so that as an adult, they socialize the Policy as well as the existence from the beginning of their development of social conditions such as beliefs and cultural values that favor the socialization of the Policy.
The attitudes referred to, as well as cultural beliefs and values, are transmitted to the individual through ritualizations (Di Caprio 1992), which he defines as “repetitive patterns of behavior characteristic of a particular society” p. 176.
Participating in the different citizen processes of socialization of politics must produce in the person the gratification of having transcended the other, of having contributed to the construction of a social collective.
The problem then lies in that not all associates see in the State the organization that guarantees the supreme Collective Good, nor as the guarantor of respect for equality in the exercise of citizen rights. The perception is today, still, that "the law is for those of ruana". This perception of the citizen in his relationship with state institutions, distances him from the socialization of politics, from public affairs. That is to say, that Albert Bandura's theses seem to have relevance when addressing this problem of motivations in the exercise of the socialization of politics if it is based on the affirmation that, ultimately, citizen behavior depends on personal factors, such as motivation, as well as the environment.
When the citizen considers the problem that there are no good reasons to participate in public life, nor characters of it worthy to imitate, the motivations of the associates are oriented to the search for the satisfaction of their needs outside the political sphere. Since the state institutions and those who govern or exercise power on their behalf do not consult the Common Good. Here the problem of the socialization of politics is exacerbated.
In conclusion, the problem of the socialization of politics is not only a matter of education and curricular content, it also involves the concept that the individual has formed from it as a result of cultural factors that largely determine the degree of participation or not of the associate in matters related to the Policy.
Bibliography
Arendt Hannadt. "What is Politics" Editorial Paidós, Barcelona, 1997, p. 46
Arzaluz. S. Socorro. "Citizen participation in local government, some theoretical reflections on the concept" 1999
Cruz Juan "What is Politics?" Publications Cruz México 1994.
DelVal Juan. “Human development”. 21st century Spain publishers 4th edition 1999 p. 76.
DiCaprio, Nicholas S1992 Theories of Personality. Mexico DF: Mcgraw-Hill.
DiCaprio, Nicholas S1992 Theories of Personality. Mexico DF: Mcgraw-Hill.
Fishbein Summarising Fishbein and Ajzen 1975, Ajzen and Fishbein 1980 Fishbein, Middlestadt and Hitchcock 1991 University of Illinois.
Peschard Jacqueline "The Democratic Political Culture". htpp: //www.ife.org.mx/InternetCDA/estaticos/DECEYEC
/la_cultura_politica_democratica.htm#V1
Pizarro Chrysostom; Palma Eduardo. "Childhood and democracy". UNICEF Editorial 1997.
