Eğitim, İdeoloji, Demokrasi ile Oy Verme Davranışı Arasındaki İlişki: Türkiye Örneği

Yıl 2021, , 199 - 212, 30.09.2021

Mehmet Şükrü Nar

https://doi.org/10.32579/mecmua.990437

Öz

Oy verme davranışı birçok değişkenle doğrudan ilişkilidir. Başta eğitim olmak üzere demokrasi, siyasal kültür, sosyal ilişkiler, ideoloji, ekonomi gibi pek çok faktör, bireyin oy verme davranışı üzerinde belirleyicidir. Bu çalışmada eğitim, ideoloji, demokrasi kavramları ile oy verme davranışı (oy verme kültürü) arasındaki ilişki Türkiye açısından analiz edilmiştir. Çalışmada veri seti olarak son 37 yıla ilişkin demokrasi endeksi, eğitim endeksi ve ideolojik rekabet endeks verileri kullanılmıştır. Eğitim endeksi ve ideolojik rekabet endeksi tarafımızdan geliştirilmiştir. Endeksler arasındaki ilişkileri incelemek için korelasyon analizi yapılmıştır. Böylece endeks kriterlerinin bir toplumun oy verme davranışını/kültürünü nasıl etkilediği ortaya konmaya çalışılmıştır. Analiz sonucuna göre, Türkiye’de farklı fikirlerin ortaya çıkmasında ideolojik rekabet yetersiz kalmaktadır. GSYH’den eğitime ayrılan payın yükseltilmesi ve eğitimde kalitenin artırılması ile farklı ideolojiler ve siyasal kimlikler ortaya çıkabilir. Eğitim sisteminde kalite düşüklüğünün giderilmesi, parlamenter demokrasinin etkinleştirilerek tam demokrasi kültürünün yerleşmesiyle oy verme davranışının da evrileceği düşünülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Oy verme davranışı, oy verme kültürü, eğitim, ideoloji, demokrasi, seçim

Kaynakça

• AACSB International. (2011). Globalization of management education. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing.
• Achterberg, P. (2006). Class voting in the new political culture; Economic, cultural and environmental voting in 20 Western countries. International Sociology, 21(2), 237–261.
• Achterberg, P., & Houtman, D. (2006). Why do so many people vote‘unnaturally’? A cultural explanation for voting behaviour. European Journal of Political Research, 45(1), 75–92.
• Benney M., Gray, E. P., & Pear, ‎R.H. (2013). How people vote: A study of electoral behaviour in Greenwich. London: Rutledge.
• Bernholz P., & Vaubel, R. (2007).The effect of interjurisdictional competition on regulation: Theory and overview. In P. Bernholz & R.Vaubel (eds.), Political competition and economic requlation (pp.1–18). Routledge.
• Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp.241–258).Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press.
• Bourdieu, P. (1993). The field of cultural production. New York: Columbia University Press.
• Bourdieu, P. (1998). Practical reason: on the theory of action. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.
• Brian, N. (2009). A comprehensive dictionary of economics. Chandigarh: Abhishek Publications.
• Bruter, M., & Harrison, S (2017). Understanding the emotional act of voting. London School of Economics.
• Campbell, D. E. (2010). Why we vote. Princeton University Press.
• Caplan, B. (2006). The myth of the rational voter. Princeton University Press.
• Chen, F., Jing, Y., & Lee, J.M. (2016). Culture matters: The looks of a leader are not all the same. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 7(6), 570–578.
• Cwalina, W., Falkowski, A.,& Newman, B. (2011). A cross-cultural theory of voter behavior. Routledge.
• Dekker, P., & Peter, E. (1987). Working class authoritarianism: A re-examination of the lipset thesis. European Journal of Political Research, 15(1), 395–415.
• Frank, T. (2020). Paul Krugman got the working class wrong. That had consequences. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/
• Gschwend, T. (2004). Strategic voting in mixed electoral systems. Wiesbaden: Statistisches Bundesamt. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-257775
• Glaeser E.L., Ponzetto, A. M., & Shleifer A. (2007).Why does democracy need education? J Econ Growth, 12(1),77–99.
• Goldman, S. (1996). Voting behavior on the United States courts of appeals, 1961-1964. The American Political Science Review, 60(2): 374–383.
• Grootaert, C. (1998). Social capital: The missing link? Social Capital Initiative Working Paper No.3, The World Bank.
• Harding, R. (2020). Rural democracy. Oxford University Press.
• Henderson, J., & Gulsrud, N.M. (2019). Street fights in copenhagen: Bicycle and car politics in a green mobility city. Routledge.
• Henriques, C. (2013). Cultural values and voter turnout. Lund University.
• Hillman, A., Metsuyanim, K., & Potrafke, N. (2015). Democracy with group identity. CESifo Working Paper, CESifo, Munich.
• Hooghe, M., & Quintelier, E. (2013). Poplitical participation in European. In S.I. Keil & O.W. Gabriel (eds.), Society and democracy in Europe. Routledge.
• Hopkins, N. (2018). Dewey, democracy and education, and the school curriculum. Education 3-13, 46(4), 1–8.
• King, B. A., &‎ Hale, K. (2016). Why don't Americans vote? Causes and consequences. ABC-CLIO.
• Lamont, M. (1987). Cultural capital and the liberal political attitudes of professionals: Comment on brint. American Journal of Sociology, 92(1),1501–1506.
• Lieske, J., & Hasecke, E. (2009). The cultural basis of party identification. Toronto Meeting Paper. Cleveland State University.
• Lin, N. (2008). Building a network theory of social capital. In N. Lin, K. Cook & R. S. Burt (eds.), Social capital theory and research (pp. 3–30). New Jersey: Aldine Transaction.
• Lipset, M. (1981). Political man: The social bases of politics. Hopkins University Press.
• Korkmaz, E. (2017). Demokrasi ve kalkınmanın alt yapısı: Eğitim. Sosyal Siyaset Konferansları Dergisi, 72, 129–143.
• Meyer, A. G. (2017). The impact of education on political ideology: Evidence from European compulsory education reforms. Economics of Education Review, 56 (1), 9–23.
• Moghaddam, F. (2005). Great ideas in psychology: A cultural and historical introduction. Oneworld Publications.
• Nar, M. (2020).The relationship between human capital and financial development: A case study of Turkey. International Journal of Financial Research,11(1), 157–170. Nelson, P.J., & Greene, K.V.(2003). Social rules and public choice. The University of Michigan Press.
• Nieuwbeerta, P. (1996). The democratic class struggle in postwar societies: Class voting in twenty countries, 1945-1990. Acta Sociologica, 39(4), 345–383.
• Pardo, J. C. (2007). Threats democracy faces: An overview. In J.C. Pardo & P. Schwartz (eds.), Public choice and the challenges of democracy (pp.15–34). Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Rowley, C. (2004). Gordon Tullock at four score years: An Evaluation. In C.K Rowley & F. Schineider (eds.), The Encyclopedia of Public Choice. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
• Sayılan, F. (2020). Eleştirel pedagoji Sözlügü. http://www.elestirelpedagoji.com/
• Smith, P. (2005). Kültürel kuram (S. Güzelsarı, İ. Gündoğdu, Çev.). İstanbul: Babil Yayınları.
• Shughart, W.F., & Razzolini, L. (2001). Public Choice. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
• Scott, H., & Samson, J. (2009). An introduction to music Studies. Cambridge University Press.
• Sjur, B., Harkavy, R., & Land, H. (2013). Reimagining democratic societies: A new era of personal and social responsibility. Council of Europe.
• Soydan, B. (2018).Yoksullar neden her yerde artık sağa oy veriyor? https://t24.com.tr/yazarlar/ baris-soydan/yoksullar.
• Tullock, G., Seldon, A., & Brady, G. (2002). Government failure: A primer in public choice. Cato Institute.
• Vowles, J., & Xezonakis, G. (2016). Globalization, positional and valence politics, and the global financial crisis. In J. Vowles & G. Xezonakis (eds.), Globalization and domestic politics: Parties, elections, and public opinion. Oxford University Press.
• Wattenberg, M. ( 2008). Is voting for young people?: With a postscript on citizen. Pearson Longman.
• Wolfgang, St. (2017). The return of the repressed. https://newleftreview.org/issues/ii104/articles/wolfgang-streeck-the-return-of-the-repressed
• Worthington, R. (2009). The idol effect: How culture reinforces voting habits in democracies. Verlag.
• Zelenicky, L., Stehlíikova, B., & Tirpakova, A. (2010). Analysis of the relationship between democracy and education using selected statistical methods. Problems of Education in The 21st Century, 21(1), 185–195.