This study introduces the concept of political disaffection, its measurement and operationalisation. Theoretically, this article builds on a differentiation between four basic types of orientations towards a political regime and its institutions: legitimacy of the regime, institutional disaffection, individual disaffection, and political dissatisfaction. Political disaffection is composed of two dimensions: institutional disaffection refers to beliefs that political institutions are not responsive to the requirements of the people; and individual disaffection reflects citizens‘ perceptions that they are able and willing to participation in politics. Principal axis factoring, reliability analysis along with internal and external validity analysis are used to examine institutional and individual disaffection using the Czech waves within ISSP (1996, 2000, 2004 and 2006). The results indicate that items used for measuring institutional and individual disaffection do measure the two concepts of interest. Moreover, repeated measurement of political disaffection and the stability of the results obtained provide strong arguments for the usage of these measures in future surveys.
A central and long-standing theoretical problem in sociology concerns how differentiated social units are integrated. This problem, however, has been peripheralised since the decline of functionalism, while legitimation and regulation/power-differentials have moved to the forefront. This article argues that by reconceptualising the concept, generalised symbolic media, a robust theory of integration can be posited that does not sacrifice the importance of regulation (control) or legitimation (meaning). This paper extends both the Simmelian and functionalist versions of media by: (1) precisely defining the concept; (2) examining its two forms-a specialised institutional language and as an external referent of value; (3) elucidating the three modes of orientation various media impose; and (4) extending the function of media beyond (social) exchange to include other institutional processes such as communicative action, performance, and ritualised interaction. Ultimately, a reconceptualised theory of generalised symbolic media offers sociology a mechanism that simultaneously highlights the diversity found across institutional spheres, as well as the limits humans have in dealing with the problems posed by differentiation.
The article offers a comparison of the development of institutions of care for children under the age of three in France and in the Czech Republic. It explains the differences in the forms of institutions, policies and the level of state support using a comparative analysis of the discourses of childcare that have existed in the two countries since the end of the Second World War. Expert discourses in particular were found to have an important role in the development of institutions and policies: psychological discursive framings had a strong influence on the public discourse, political decisions and the resulting form of institutions. While in France mainly empirically‑oriented psychologists and pedagogues entered the debate, in Czechoslovakia/the Czech Republic the discursive arena was dominated by clinical psychologists and paediatricians. Other influential factors were identified, such as the economic situation, political actors, social movements; and sequencing of events; but the expert discourse was proved to be crucial for the understanding of the divergent development of childcare institutions in the two countries.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.