It is common for children to inherit from their parents things as visible as facial features, height or eye color. They also inherit character traits, less perceptible to the naked eye, but which provoke phrases such as: “He is just like her mother/father” and even that grandfather or grandmother whom the child has never met. Genetics, a fascinating discipline, has those things.
However, when we talk about political ideology, the correlation is not so clear. There are children who think exactly the same as their parents, while others go to the opposite extreme: left-wing parents can produce a child who votes for Vox or parents who adore José María Aznar, a pro-independence child. Families are not fortified and immovable entities: children are autonomous beings, with the capacity to build their own political ideas.
Anyway, this is not the norm. Although ideology is not a matter of genetics, it is usually transmitted from parents to children almost as if it were. Just as the duty to go to vote can also be transmitted in the family: various studies show that, in the most advanced democracies, this habit is formed during upbringing. And, unlike other habits (like having your children make the bed or set the table), it is not that difficult to establish. Education, in this aspect, is very effective.
This is maintained, among others, by the South African political scientist Mark N. Franklin, who has studied the voting dynamics of 22 countries, reaching the conclusion that educating the family about the duty to vote consolidates a lifelong habit. That is to say: the example of parents regarding voting has a lot of influence. Thus, if this election Sunday you go with your young son to see, in situ, how democracy works, a dynamic will begin to be created that will always accompany him.
Franklin assures that people who vote consistently, in their first three elections, will probably become lifelong voters. “Someone who [in those early days] has only voted once may never vote again,” she declared in the New York Times. On the contrary, someone who, after coming of age, voted three consecutive times, “may not vote on some occasions, but will do so again.”
Toni Rodón, professor of Political Science at the Pompeu Fabra University, agrees with this thesis, whose fields of research include political participation. Rodón is 39 years old and comes from a “very politicized” family, in which the Transition was experienced intensely. Today’s political scientist remembers that, as a child, he had dinner at his house watching Telenotícies: “And we always discussed the news of the day as a family. It was an element of socialization and, in fact, many of those who previously criticized televisions now miss them, because today everyone dine in front of their screens.”
But another thing that was done—and continues to be done—in the Rodón family is going to vote together. “And when I say ‘together’, I’m not saying vote the same thing, but as a family, my father, my mother, my sister and I, we meet an hour away, we vote and then we eat,” he describes. Although this act seems trivial, the literature also shows that it is important to create a civic culture of participation: “It is created as a kind of ritual around voting that has a lifelong impact, as corroborated by several studies,” he says. Rodon.
Because we vote not only because we care about politics, but also because we have the habit of voting. From the time they are babies, parenting is built on routines (bedtime, mealtime, story time, bath time, vacations…) and voting would be one more. Thus, if it is instilled and given the importance it has—even as a contemporary rite of passage into adulthood—a seed is planted for the future.
But the family, adds Toni Rodón, not only influences the habit of going to vote, but also what one is going to vote for. “Most of the time, children behave in a very similar way to their parents, because a process of ideological self-selection occurs, similar to what occurs in many couples,” he explains. Although, logically, this is not always the case: “How we think and how we vote influences the selection of the partner and, normally, this ideological affinity goes downwards: it is common for it to be transmitted to the children.”
A transmission that starts soon. Studies, says Rodón, indicate that a large part of our political opinion is formed in two key moments of our lives: “The first is from the ages of three to six, which is when your brain is developing and, through family, basic values ??are acquired (or not), such as equality, cooperation, gender stereotypes and solidarity, which are correlated with thinking in a certain way.”
The second period goes from fourteen to twenty-one years: “It is when in high school and, later, in university, you hang out with people similar to you. Little by little, opinions are reinforced and your political identity emerges. In technical terms, this stage is known as ‘the impressionable years’, and it is the moment in which a certain ideology is acquired.” An ideology, adds the professor, that throughout life will change very little. “The consensus is that when you acquire an ideology when you are young, it becomes a kind of ‘backpack’ that you will carry when you are older and, although you can change a little, if you are on the left you will not become extreme right, for example” .
In short, even today, the main source of ideological transmission is still the family; a nucleus that transmits both the values ??of participation and the meaning of voting. And we qualify the “yet” because, as Rodón points out, things are changing: “The family has lost weight, in favor of friends and partners.” There are also other aspects, such as very strong current crises, that can impact those aforementioned ideological backpacks. “The economic crisis of 2008 or the Procés, in 2017, affect the meaning of the vote. These shocks, which are called socialization, imply that the possibility of changing it is considered.”
Speaking of shocks: when a child says that he or she does not plan to vote, using taglines like “everyone is equal,” it can come as a shock to some parents (or grandparents) who suffered under Franco. Political scientist Toni Rodón understands this displeasure: “Especially, for those who, during the Transition, acquired the ‘duty to vote’: a backpack that they carry, but that their children, like many of their generation, do not have as internalized.”
And, whether we like it or not, young people born in democracy do not have this civic duty so assimilated. “And if this lack of interest is mixed with the absence of a good Citizenship Education subject, with political or economic crises like those mentioned or with cases of corruption, everything results in young people being very critical,” says Rodón.
It is also proven, adds the political scientist, that in families with less income, they vote less. For this reason: “Today there is a certain cynicism and, more than disaffection, dissatisfaction, regarding politics.” However, the UPF professor is convinced that, despite the disenchantment, “those children raised in mobilized families, although dissatisfied, will go to vote, because they have internalized those democratic values ??since childhood.”
