Final answer:
The government's role in both political socialization and economic planning is not predetermined but is influenced by various factors including the environment and election cycles. While authoritarian governments may plan for the long term, in democracies, planning is shorter term and requires public support and adherence to democratic and market principles. Economic planning during WWII in the U.S. balanced government intervention with private enterprise.
Step-by-step explanation:
The role of government intervention, whether in the form of economic planning or political socialization, is a complex one that unfolds in environments where many variables shape outcomes. For example, political socialization is not simply a matter of government design; it includes a myriad of factors ranging from the environment one grows up in to genetic predispositions. Importantly, while governments may induce certain policies with intent, individuals are not predisposed to inherently follow or reject these, as socialization is a more fluid and unpredictable process.
In terms of economics, governments may engage in planned economies where businesses are nationalized, as seen historically in India under Nehru's government. However, such approaches can be constrained by election cycles in democratic countries, where planning typically spans shorter terms. This contrasts with authoritarian regimes, which might be more capable of executing long-term strategies. Yet, these strategies are often focused on national prosperity rather than global objectives.
Nonetheless, government actions require support from an informed public and are subject to scrutiny and debate within the context of democratic and market principles. For instance, during World War II, the U.S. government utilized economic planning, though private enterprise still prevailed, showing a distinctive American approach to government intervention unlike that of totalitarian systems.