Volunteers themselves restrict political talk to preserve their civic faith

Evidence

Advocates of democracy have long looked to groups that work on small, local issues as potential schools for wider political concern. Volunteers shared faith in this ideal of civic participation, but in practice, paradoxically, maintaining this hope and faith meant curtailing political discussion: members sounded less publicly minded and less politically creative in groups than they sounded individually. In the ideal image of the public sphere, citizens casually talk politics in voluntary associations, widening their horizons just by becoming members. In the ideal, such groups encourage ‘‘unrestricted communication’’ (Habermas 1974); usually, Americans imagine that any ‘‘restrictions’’ on public debate must come from outside of the groups themselves — from laws preventing freedom of assembly (Scott 1990; Havel 1989), or, more subtly, from propaganda that prevents people from learning about politics (Chomsky 1988; Stauber and Rampton 1996; Parenti 1993, for example) — or, even more subtly, from long-standing oppression that makes people unable to stand up for themselves (Gaventa 1980). But here, participants did some of the work of restricting communication themselves: they assumed that talking about politics would only sap vigor from the healthy tasks which volunteer groups realistically could set for themselves, and it would intimidate new members. — Nina Eliasoph, Avoiding politics, 192

Categorization

• DEEPTHINKING: Turns the civic-republican ‘schools of democracy’ assumption on its head: the very hope for empowerment among volunteers depends on suppressing the wider political discussion that civic theory expects groups to foster. Restriction is self-imposed, not external.
• XREF: Directly speaks to the reader’s core research question — solidarity building absent an out-group. Here the group’s positive shared task is maintained precisely by excluding wider talk; Eliasoph frames this as producing apathy, not solidarity. — connects to: Volunteer-style charity work forfeits the power to define public issues — Nina Eliasoph, Avoiding politics: how Americans…, 137; Volunteers silence political problems to keep the empowering feeling alive — Nina Eliasoph, Avoiding politics: how Americans…, 182; Volunteer groups suppress political talk even though members privately care — Nina Eliasoph, Avoiding politics: how Americans…, 192 (+14 more)
• SEED: Potential angle: ‘the civic faith that silences itself’ — how local volunteer groups’ commitment to feeling empowered actively forecloses the political discussion civic theory predicts they will host.
• QUESTION: Is this self-restriction specific to American volunteer culture, or a general feature of group maintenance? Would a solidarity built on a contested shared project also require this suppression?

Broader Connections

• Volunteers silence political discussion to preserve their can-do optimism #corroborates (0.92) — Nina Eliasoph, Avoiding politics, 204
• Volunteer groups suppress political talk even though members privately care #corroborates (0.90) — Nina Eliasoph, Avoiding politics, 192
• Volunteers suppress political talk because it would sink their feeling of empowerment #expands (0.85)
• Volunteer groups suppress politically troubling topics to protect group cheer #corroborates (0.85) — Nina Eliasoph, “Close to home”, 96
• A shared meeting setting suppresses volunteered political speech that members hold privately. #corroborates (0.85) — Nina Eliasoph, “Close to home”, 98
• Volunteers suppress principled political talk because it seems unseemly #expands (0.82) — Nina Eliasoph, Avoiding politics, 276
• Civic volunteers suppress political worry publicly despite private obsession with it #corroborates (0.80) — Nina Eliasoph, Avoiding politics, 285
• Even politically engaged volunteer groups avoid discussing the substance of public issues #expands (0.80) — Nina Eliasoph, Avoiding politics, 213
• People voice political opinions privately but suppress them in group settings. #corroborates (0.78)
• Volunteers welcomed structured political discussion despite avoiding it informally. #qualifies (0.75) — Nina Eliasoph, “Close to home”, 100
• Citizens express political ideas privately yet avoid public political engagement #corroborates (0.75) — Nina Eliasoph, Avoiding politics, 1