3. Chapter 1: Thinking about Social Change in
America
P. 15 “Kids today just aren’t joiners.”
Is this true?
How many groups/clubs/organizations do you belong to?
People are less trusting of those around them today.
What do you think? Can you trust people, generally?
Membership in community groups increased up to
the 1960s.
Why is that?
Membership in community groups declined over the
last several decades
Why this has occurred is the central question of the book.
What do you think?
4. Social Capital
P. 18 “the core idea of social capital theory is that
social networks have value.”
What does that mean?
P. 19 “social capital refers to connections among
individuals – social networks and the norms of
reciprocity and trustworthiness that arise from them.”
How is this “capital”?
Why might it be useful?
Can we measure social capital?
How much do you have?
Do you find that your social capital helps you in your
everyday life?
5. Physical vs. Human vs. Social
What is physical capital?
Money or other tangible resources (what you can own)
What is human capital?
Collectively, people to accomplish some end
Individually, the skills and abilities an individual has
Which is more important when it comes to jobs?
P. 20 “most of us get our jobs because of whom we know, not
what we know…”
Private aspect of social capital: We benefit from having a
network of connections
Public aspect of social capital: Others benefit from
connected communities
How?
6. Reciprocity
We tend to be willing to reciprocate actions – if
someone does something for you, you are willing to
return the favor
What about generalized reciprocity?
What is it?
How many of you engage in it and how do you do so?
Includes the idea of the Golden Rule
Examples: Driving, picking up trash, getting vaccinations
Is generalized reciprocity a good thing or bad thing?
7. Bridging vs. Bonding
Social capital can be used to bridge social divides
Getting to know people in an outgroup reduces prejudice
It also spreads information and provides additional
opportunities
Examples?
Paper with John Stinespring; he’s an economist
It can also be used to forge stronger bonds between
members of a homogeneous group
Spending time with people in your ingroups increases
solidarity
Also useful for getting ahead
Examples?
Book chapter in book for James Richardson and Stuart Wright
8. Community Decline
What do you think…
Which generation is better at being a concerned citizen,
involved in helping others in the community, yours or your
parents?
Do you think people are more less involved in community
activities.
Is there a breakdown in community in the US?
Is selfishness a problem in the US?
Is the honesty and integrity of the average American
improving or growing worse?
Are people becoming more or less civil?
Are social and moral values higher now or were they
higher in the past?
9. Data
Lots of sources (see references in the back)
Uses the “I may not be able to prove this
authoritatively, but I can provide overwhelming
evidence to support my argument” approach
Is this a valid approach?
11. Chapter 2: Political Participation
How are we doing compared to other countries?
Americans are less likely to vote and are less engaged
politically than most other democratic countries
How are we doing compared to our own past?
Same story, to some degree…
12. Figure 1: Trends in Presidential Voting
(1828-1996), by Region
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
PercentageofEligibleAdultsVoting
Outside
South
Jim Crow
laws
introduced
Civil rights
movement
Is the decline in voting generational?
13. % Voted in Presidential Elections by Cohort (GSS)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004
1880-1900
1901-1920
1921-1940
1941-1960
1961-1980
1981+
Does this data agree with the generational argument?
16. Other declines
How interested are you in politics?
What about current events?
Fraction of Americans uninvolved in any political activities has
increased by nearly one-third over the last 30 years
P. 40 “On reflection, then, the contrast between increasing
party organizational vitality and declining voter involvement is
perfectly intelligible. Since their “consumers” are tuning out
from politics, parties have to work harder and spend much
more, competing furiously to woo votes, workers, and
donations and to do that they need a (paid) organizational
infrastructure.”
Has he reversed the causal direction here?Decline in
Participation
Increase in
Professionalizati
on
Decline in
Participation
Increase in
Professionalizati
on
17. Figure 4: Trends in Civic Engagement I:
Partisan Activities
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
Attended Political Rally or
Speech
Worked for a Political Party
18. Figure 5: Trends in Civic Engagement II:
Communal Participation
0
5
10
15
20
25
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
Attended a Public Meeting on Town or
School Affairs
Served as an Officer of Some Club or
Organization
Served on a Committee for Some Local
Organization
Member of Some Group Interested in
Better Government
19. Figure 6: Trends in Civic Engagement III:
Public Expression
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
signed a
petition
wrote politician
wrote a letter to
the paper
made a speech
wrote an article
for a magazine
or newspaper
20. Table 1. Trends in political and community
participation
Activity Relative change 1973-
74 to 1993-94
Served as an officer of some club or organization -42%
Worked for a political party -42%
Served on a committee for some local organization -39%
Attended a public meeting on town or school affairs -35%
Attended a political rally or speech -34%
Participated in at least one of these twelve activities -25%
Made a speech -24%
Wrote congressman or senator -23%
Signed a petition -22%
Was a member of some “better government” group -19%
Held or ran for political office -16%
Wrote a letter to the paper -14%
Wrote an article for a magazine or newspaper -10%
21. Chapter 3 – Civic Participation
Americans are pretty good “joiners” compared to
most countries, though less prolific than Europeans
Any guesses as to why?
Three types of voluntary associations:
Community based, church based, work based
Numbers of groups have increased, but not the
memberships
Average sizes of memberships is falling
Many are simply professionally staffed advocacy
groups based in D.C.
No meetings; no chapters; just asking for donations
How many of these types of groups do you belong
to?
22. Figure 7: The Growth of National Nonprofit
Associations, 1968-1997
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
NationalNonprofitAssociationsperMillionPopulation
23. Figure 8: Average Membership Rate in Thirty-Two
National Chapter-Based Associations, 1900-19971900
1904
1908
1912
1916
1920
1924
1928
1932
1936
1940
1944
1948
1952
1956
1960
1964
1968
1972
1976
1980
1984
1988
1992
membership rate
mean membership
24. Figure 9: The Rise and Fall of the PTA, 1910-1997
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1900
1904
1908
1912
1916
1920
1924
1928
1932
1936
1940
1944
1948
1952
1956
1960
1964
1968
1972
1976
1980
1984
1988
1992
1997
Membersper100Familieswith
Kids18andUnder
27. Time Diaries
Amount of time people spend in organizational life has
declined based on time diary data
3.7 hours per month in 1965
2.9 in 1975
2.3 in 1983 and 1995
On average day, percentage spent time in a community
organization:
7% in 1965
3% in 1995
Money spent on club and fraternal dues
6 cents/dollar spent in 1929
3 cents/dollar spent in 1997
Primarily due to generational changes
28. Chapter 4: Religious Participation
Church affiliation has increased over time in the US
Though identifying as religious hasn’t really
In recent years it is declining, though most of the decline
has occurred since this book was published
Additionally, participation in informal groups (not worship
services) is down by about 20%
Is the decline of religion a good thing? Bad thing?
½ of all associational membership in America are church
related
½ of all personal philanthropy is religious in character
½ of all volunteering occurs in a religious context
Religious people have more social capital; they know
more people
29. Figure 12: Church Membership, 1936-1999:
Church Records and Survey Data
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
1930
1933
1936
1939
1942
1945
1948
1951
1954
1957
1960
1963
1966
1969
1972
1975
1978
1981
1984
1987
1990
1993
1996
1999
ChurchMembersper100Population
gallup Poll
Church Records
30. Figure 13: Trends in Church
Attendance, 1940-1999
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55 1940
1943
1946
1949
1952
1955
1958
1961
1964
1967
1970
1973
1976
1979
1982
1985
1988
1991
1994
1997
AverageWeeklyChurchAttendanceAs
FractionofAdultPopulation
This is a misleading… See the same slide without zooming in on
the Y-axis…
31. Figure 13: Trends in Church
Attendance, 1940-1999
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100 1940
1943
1946
1949
1952
1955
1958
1961
1964
1967
1970
1973
1976
1979
1982
1985
1988
1991
1994
1997
AverageWeeklyChurchAttendanceAs
FractionofAdultPopulation
Reported church attendance hasn’t declined much at all…
32. Religious Beliefs
Claims that beliefs are not reflecting the same declines
P. 69 “Measured by the yardstick of personal beliefs, Americans’ religious
commitment has been reasonably stable over the last half-century –
certainly much more so than one might assume from some public
commentary about the secularization of American life. Virtually all
Americans say they believe in God…”
Simply inaccurate (see ARIS 2008)
2.3 4.3 5.7
12.1
69.5
5.3
0.8
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
There is no
such thing.
There is no
way to
know
I'm not
sure
There is a
higher
power but
no
personal
God
There is
definitely a
personal
God
Don't know Refused
33. Declines in Religiosity
P. 75 “The result is that the country is becoming ever
more clearly divided into two groups – the devoutly
observant and the entirely unchurched… This is the
sociological substratum that underlies the much
discussed “culture wars” of recent years.”
Some evidence for this
Implications?
34. Chapter 5: Connections in the Workplace
How many belong to a union?
How many would join a union?
What about work-related sports team?
Other work-related groups?
Work-related groups are also on the decline
Clearest illustration is union membership
Putnam suggests it is not due to “virulent employer
resistance, flaccid union strategy” etc. but rather to people
not wanting to join unions
Why, in light of Marx, might people not want to join
unions? What have corporations done to prevent this?
36. Figure 15: Average Membership Rate in Eight
National Professional Associations, 1900-19971900
1904
1908
1912
1916
1920
1924
1928
1932
1936
1940
1944
1948
1952
1956
1960
1964
1968
1972
1976
1980
1984
1988
1992
1997
membership rate
mean membership
37. Organic Solidarity
What about workplace friends?
How many of your friends are people with whom you
work?
Have workplaces become the institutions of social
solidarity advocated by Durkheim to provide social
capital?
Job satisfaction is down
When asked, “Which do you enjoy more, the hours when
you are on your job, or the hours when you are not on
your job?”
1955 – 44% said on the job; 1999 – 16% said on the job
38. Chapter 6: Informal Social Connections
Machers – individuals who invest lots of time in
formal organizations
Tend to follow current events, attend meetings, participate
in clubs, give to charity, read the paper, follow politics, etc.
Tend to be better educated and have higher incomes;
also tend to be older and more likely to be married; long
time residents and homeowners
Schmoozers – individuals who spend lots of time in
informal conversation
Tend to host people, hang out with friends, play
cards, frequent bars, and send greeting cards; tend to be
younger, more frequent movers; women are more likely to
be schmoozers
Tend to overlap, but not necessarily
39. Informal Social Connections
The amount of time spent with other people is also
on the decline
Part of this is due to density of social networks being
lower in cities than in rural areas; city dwellers know
fewer neighbors than country dwellers
40. Figure 16: Social and Leisure Activities of
American Adults (1986-1990)
0
20
40
60
80
100
%ofAdultsWhoEngagedinGivenActivity
atLeastOnceinthePastMonth
41. Figure 17: Frequency of Selected Formal
and Informal Social Activities, 1975-1998
0 5 10 15 20 25
Attended Church Services
Visited Relatives
Ate Dinner at a Restaurant
Sent Greeting Card
Wrote Letter to Friend or Relative
Entertained at Home
Played Cards
Attended a Club Meeting
Went to Bar or Tavern
Gave or Attended Dinner party
Went to Movies
Attended Sporting Event
worked on Community Project
Played Team Sport
Wrote Letter to the Editor
Average Number of Times per year
42. Figure 18a: Social Visiting Declines, 1975-
1999 – Entertained at Home Last Year
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18 1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
AverageTimesEntertainedatHomeLastYear
43. Figure 18b: Social Visiting Declines, 1975-
1999
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
Have friends in for
Evening at Least
Twice a Month
Went to Home of
Friends during Past
Week
44. Figure 19: Family Dinners Become Less
Common, 1977-1999
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
Definitely Agree
Generally or Moderately Agree
Disagree
46. Figure 20: Bars, Restaurants, and Luncheonettes
Give Way to Fast Food, 1970-1998
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
1970 1980 1990 1998
Other Eating and
Drinking Outlets
Coffee Bars/Shops
Bars and Taverns
Restaurants
Luncheonettes
Fast Food
Implications for social
capital?
52. Figure 27: The Growth of Spectator
Sports, 1960-1997
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
1960
1962
1964
1966
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
AttendanceatMajorSportingEvents
per1,000Population
Total live attendance (standardized for total U.S.
population) at all NCAA football and basketball
games, all Major League
baseball, football, basketball, and hockey games, and
NASCAR auto races.
53. Informal Social Connections
Time diaries support the declines in time spent
schmoozing
65% spent time schmoozing in 1965 every day; 39% did
in 1995
Average daily time devoted to schmoozing fell from 85
minutes in 1965 to 57 minutes in 1995
Americans are also spending less time DOING
sports, but more time watching
Exception may be bowling…
Ironically, nobody “bowls alone”, though bowling alleys are
adding TVs
Good thing? Bad thing?
We also spend more time observing (museums) and
less time doing (church)
Good thing? Bad thing?
54. Chapter 7: Altruism, Volunteering, and
Philanthropy
People who are involved in social groups are more likely
to give money and volunteer for charities
P. 117 “As Andrew Carnegie, one of the new millionaires
who emerged from the period of rapid growth following
the Civil War, proclaimed in his 1889 essay “The Gospel
of Wealth,” wealth was a sacred trust which its possessor
was bound to administer for the good of the community.”
What does this suggest?
A divine right to wealth; that this is how the social order should be.
By 1995 – 654,186 public charities in the US (not
churches)
½ of Americans engage in volunteer work
$143.5 billion donated in 1997
74% donate money; 35% donate time; 23% donate blood
55. Altruism, Volunteering and Philanthropy
Do the wealthy give more than the poor?
In absolute numbers, yes
As a percentage of their wealth, no.
In 1996 - 73% of members of secular organizations and
55% of members of religious groups volunteered
Of those with no group memberships, only 19% volunteered
In 1996 – 87% of members of secular organizations and
76% of religious organizations donated to charity
Of those with no group memberships, only 37% donated
People involved with religious organizations tend to
volunteer within their organization, whereas people
involved in secular groups tend to volunteer in the
community
Joiners are nearly ten times more generous with their
time and money than are nonjoiners
56. Figure 28: Volunteering Fostered by
Clubgoing and Churchgoing
Never
Less Than Monthly
Monthly or More
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Monthly
or More
Less
Than
Monthly
Never
ClubAttendance
MeanTimesVolunteeringperYear
Church Attendance
57. Figure 29: Schmoozing and Good Works
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
None 1-4
Times
5-8
Times
9-11
Times
12-24
Times
25-51
Times
53 or
More
Times
TimesperYearVolunteeredor
WorkedonCommunityProject
How Many Times in the Past Year Did You Entertain Friends at
Home
Volunteered
58. Figure 30: Blood Donation Fostered by
Clubgoing and Churchgoing
No
Yes
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Yes
No
13.8
10.8
15.2
14.5
AttendsClubMeetingsatLeast
Monthly?
WhatFractionofEachCategoryAre
RegularBloodDonors?
Attends Church at Least Twice Monthly?
This is another misleading graph in the book…
Here’s how it looks in the book…
59. He changed the scale on the left to accentuate the difference –
look back at the previous slide to compare
60. Altruism, Volunteering and Philanthropy
over time
People are giving more now than in the past, even
when adjusted for inflation
1960 - $280 per capita; 1995 - $522 per capita
But people are giving less of their personal income
as a percentage
1964 – 2.26% of income; 1.61% in 1998
61.
62.
63.
64.
65. Figure 33: Reported Charitable Giving
Declined in the 1980s and 1990s
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Give to Religious
Organizations at Least
Occasionally
Contributed to Charity in
Last Month
66. Figure 34: Volunteering Up, Community
Projects Down, 1975-1999
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9 1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
TimesLastYear
Volunteered
Worked on Community
Project
Tricky issue here:
People have redefined volunteering to include doing personal
favors for other people
67. Figure 35: Trends in Volunteering by Age
Category, 1975-1998
-50 0 50 100 150 200
25 or Less
26-30
31-35
36-40
41-45
46-50
51-55
56-60
61-65
66-70
71-75
Over 75
Percent Change, 1975-98
Those doing the
volunteering are
older
68. Figure 36: Trends in Participation in Community
Projects by Age Category, 1975-1998
-80 -70 -60 -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0
25 or Less
26-30
31-35
36-40
41-45
46-50
51-55
56-60
61-65
66-70
71-75
Over 75
Percent Change, 1975-98
Why are the elderly doing most of the volunteering?
69. Chapter 8: Reciprocity, Honesty, and Trust
Touchstone of social capital is generalized reciprocity –
golden rule
Generally being able to trust people improves health and
reduces stress
Why?
Examples of how not trusting people causes stress?
Tit for Tat
Respond in kind
Tit for Two Tats
Respond in kind with extra generosity
People who trust are better citizens and more involved.
Why are city-dwellers less trusting than non city-
dwellers?
70. Figure 37: Declining Perceptions of Honesty
and Morality, 1952-1998
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1952 1965 1976 1998
Do You Think People in General Today Lead as Good Lives –
Honest and Moral – as They Used To?
71. Figure 38: Four Decades of Dwindling Trust:
Adults and Teenagers, 1960-1999
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1960
1962
1964
1966
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
PercentWhoSay“MostPeopleCan
BeTrusted”Insteadof“YouCan’tBe
TooCarefulinDealingwithPeople”
Adults (Multi-Survey
Average)
High School Students
72. Figure 39: Generational Succession
Explains most of the Decline in Social Trust
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
Agree“MostPeopleAreHonest”
Born before 930
Born 1930-1945
Born 1946-1960
Born after 1960
73. Decline in Trust
Thick trust may be the same – the close trust with friends
What do you think? Can you still trust your closest
friends/acquaintances?
Thin trust – generalized reciprocity – may be declining
Are you less likely to trust a store employee?
What about picking up a hitchhiker or stopping to help
someone?
How many of you do that? Is this a decline in thin trust?
P. 142 “People under forty-five are twice as likely to screen
calls as those over sixty-five, who are more trusting and more
civically inclined. Superficially one might respond that
technological development enabled all these changes, but
those technologies themselves were surely a response to
market demand.”
I’m not sure I buy this. I screen my calls because it comes with my
phone, not because I want to. I basically answer every call that
comes in.
74. Figure 40: The Changing Observance of
Stop Signs
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
FractionofDrivers
No Stop
Rolling Stop
Full Stop
77. Chapter 9: Against the Tide? Small
Groups, Social Movements, and the Net
There may be some movement against the decline in
social capital
Self help groups – 2% of all US adults involved in some
sort of group; lifetime usage is 3% (not a lot, but
something)
Social movement activism is a way to strengthen social
capital
How many are involved in a social movement? How many
have protested something? Anything?
Too young to have been involved in the Civil Rights
Movement or Women’s Rights (ERA); what about
environmental movements? Anyone?
Even if people are involved in the environmentalist
movement, most are members, not activists – send
money, don’t give time
Many of these groups allocate 20%-30% of funds to fund-
raising and advertising
Lots of dropping out
79. New vs. Old Groups
Members of older groups are more likely to stay
Why?
They are part of a community, not just a member of a mailing list
Many of the mailing list members don’t consider themselves
members, just donors.
This is a little different for the Christian Right (Moral
Majority)
They did seem to be more united, but they have fallen apart in
recent years
Ralph Reed was involved in fund-raising scandals; Jerry
Falwell is dead; Pat Robertson has alienated moderates
Even so, evangelicals are very involved politically (though this
is beginning to change)
What about the growth of initiatives on statewide ballots?
Mostly in 5 states and primarily driven by professional firms
People don’t pay attention to what the ballots are…
81. Figure 45: The Graying of Protest
Demonstrations
0
5
10
15
20
25
ParticipationinProtest
Demonstrations
Age 30-59
Age under 30
Age over 59
82. One Possible Reversal - Technology
Technology may have the power to increase social
capital
The telephone allows people to remain in contact and
develop social networks
It’s widespread
It appears to reduce loneliness, but also reduce face-to-
face socializing
Good thing? Bad thing?
Actually seems to reinforce local ties over long-distance
ties as people call neighbors more often than people far
away
40% to 50% of all phone calls are within a 2 mile radius
Transformed but didn’t replace local social networks
Think this has changed with free long distance? How many of
you even think about long distance calls anymore?
83.
84. Figure 46b: Trends in long-Distance
Personal Phone Calls and Letters
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Mean Number of Phone Calls in past Month to Friends or Relatives
Over 100 Miles Away
Mean Number of Personal Letters in Past Month to Friends and
Relatives
85. Virtual Social Capital
The book obviously predates social networking sites (a.k.a. social
capital sites)
Do these sites create, maintain, or transform social networks?
Did he not foresee the potential transformation of social networks
online?
Facebook has 200 million users
Other sites have hundreds of millions as well
(MySpace, Orkut, LinkedIn, etc.)
Can you have legitimate social networks through a website?
I’m co-authoring a paper right now with 2 people I’ve never met in person
– just through the internet
Do you behave differently online? Are you less respecting of
peoples’ social status? (flatter hierarchies)
Might the internet simply reinforce social capital networks and
inequalities?
Where do you spend your time online? With whom?
Is it just making previously active groups more active?
87. Chapter 10: Introduction
If education increases civic engagement,
And educational attainment has increased over the
last 40 years,
Then why hasn’t civic engagement gone up?
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
educational attainment in years
88. Chapter 11: Pressures of Time and Money
What about being too busy?
Do you think you’re too busy to participate in all of the
activities we’ve talking about?
People say they feel busier and more rushed now
than in the 1960s
Most people say they work hard most of the time and
we’re more likely to say we stay late at work
The most harried:
Full-time workers, women, people between 25 and
54, parents of younger children, single parents
What about job insecurity, declining real wages, and
growing economic inequality?
89. Are we working longer?
On average, we’re working about the same number of
hours
But we actually have more leisure time, primarily thanks
to time-saving devices (dishwashers, washers and
dryers, ovens, microwaves, etc.); about 6.2 hours more
per week (more for men than women)
But “average” does not mean “universal”
People with more education are working more hours
The “average” includes men taking early retirement
Dual earner couples spent about 14 hours more at work per
week in 1998 than they did in 1969
Thus, it’s precisely the people who used to contribute the
most time to social capital activities who are working
more hours; especially women
90. Other Time Issues
Busy people tend to forego TV watching – no time
for TV either
Despite feeling like they have less time, involvement
has dropped across groups, including among those
who have more time
This suggests that it isn’t a time issue that explains
the decline in social activity, though it may contribute
91. Money?
People are under more pressure today than they used to be to
make money:
No social safety net
Men don’t make as much as they used to
Economy is more volatile
People don’t feel as financially secure
74% said “our family income is high enough to satisfy nearly all
our important desires” in 1974; dropped to 61% in 1999
When people are worried about money, they don’t spend it on
social activities (e.g., movies, etc.)
Though they do watch TV; the only leisure activity positively
correlated with financial anxiety is watching TV
However, the decline in social activity has been linear while
financial security has gone up and down.
Probably not a money issue.
92. Women in the Paid Labor Force?
Number of women working outside the home in the
1950s was less than 30%
By the 1990s it was more than 67%
Does this translate into less social activity?
Working full-time (after controlling for
age, education, financial security, marital and
parental status), leads to:
10% less home entertaining
15% less club and church attendance
25% less informal visiting with friends
50% less volunteering
Husbands of wives who work full time are also less
likely to do these activities
93. Figure 47: Working by Choice and by Necessity
Among American Women, 1978-1999
Necessity (Kids/Money)
Satisfaction
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
8 11
31
29
10 11
PercentageofAllWomen
Why are women
working outside the
home?Virtually all the increase in full-time employment of
American women over the last twenty years is attributable
to financial pressures, not personal fulfillment.
94. Figure 48: More Women Work Because They
Must, 1978-1999
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
PercentageofAllWomen
Work Full-time for
Financial Reasons
Work Full-time for
Personal Satisfaction
95. Figure 49: Working Full-Time Reduces
Community Involvement
Necessity (Kids/Money)
Satisfaction
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
ClubMeetingsperYear(ComparedwithallMen)
Women who work full-
time because they
have to are the least
involved.
One practical way to increase community engagement in America would
be to make it easier for women (and men too) to work part-time if they
wished.
96. Chapter 12: Mobility and Sprawl
Residential stability is strongly associated with civic
engagement
Why?
People who have recently moved into an area are:
Less likely to vote, have supportive networks of friends
and neighbors, belong to civic organizations, attend
church, attend club meetings, volunteer, or work on
community projects
Could the declines in civic engagement be due to
rising mobility?
Simple answer: No. Mobility hasn’t increased over
the last 50 years. It’s actually declined.
97. Rural vs. Urban
What about where you live?
Are people who live in urban areas less likely to be
involved?
Why might that be the case?
It’s not who you are but where you are.
And more people live in urban areas now than they
used to.
98. Figure 50: Community Involvement Is Lower
in Major Metropolitan Areas
0 5 10 15 20 25
Rural and Towns under 10,000
Town of 10,000 to 50,000
Suburb of City 50,000 to 250,000
Central City of 50,000 to 250,000
Suburb of City 250,000 to 1
Million
Central City of 250,000 to 1
Million
Suburb of City 1 Million and Over
Central City 1 Million and Over
Percentage of Population Active in Last Year
Served as Officer
or Committee
Member of Local
Group
Attended a Public
Meeting on Town
or School Affairs
99. Figure 51: Church Attendance Is Lower in
Major Metropolitan Areas
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Rural and Towns Less than 50,000
Metro Area 50,000-500,00 Noncentral City
Metro Area 50,000-500,000 Central City
Metro Area 500,000 - 2 Million Noncentral City
Metro Area 500,000 - 2 Million Central City
Metro Area More than 2 Million Noncentral City
Metro Area More than 2 Million Central City
Church Attendance per Year
101. Mobility and Sprawl
What about within gated communities; is there more
civic engagement?
Evidence suggests that exclusive, homogenous gated
communities aren’t all that involved, civically. Why?
Nothing to get people riled up.
What about commuting?
Average American spends 72 minutes per day behind the
wheel
Does that eat into civic engagement time?
Each additional ten minutes in daily commuting time cuts
involvement in community affairs by 10%.
102. Chapter 13: Technology and Mass Media
The primary question in this chapter is whether
technology and mass media have led to a decline in
civic engagement
First you have to establish the widespread adoption
of mass media…
103. Table 2: Pace of Introduction of Selected
Consumer Goods
Technological
Invention
Household Penetration
Begins (1 Percent)
Years to Reach 75 Percent
of American Households
Telephone 1890 67
Automobile 1908 52
Vacuum cleaner 1913 48
Air conditioner 1952 ~48
Refrigerator 1925 23
Radio 1923 14
VCR 1980 12
Television 1948 7
Not included is internet access – about 75% of US homes have internet
access.
Basically, most people in the US are exposed to mass media.
104. Figure 53: Generational Succession
Explains the Demise of newspapers
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
ReadNewspaperDaily
Born before 1929
Born 1929-1945
Born 1946-1960
Born after 1960
Fewer people are reading newspapers, but those who do are more
civically engaged, even after controlling for age, education, and
rootedness.
105. Figure 54: Newshounds Are a Vanishing
Breed
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
PercentageWho“Definitely”or“Generally”
Agree“INeedtoGettheNewsEveryDay”
Born before 1929
Born 1929-1945
Born 1946-1960
Born after 1960
How many of you qualify as “newshounds”?
106. Television
We’ve already discussed how many watch TV, but what
is the problem with it?
Pervasive and addictive
Another interesting issue – TV news isn’t necessarily
“news” – often includes advertisements as well
(see Today show clip from April 18th, 2009)
Watching TV increases materialist attitudes – people want
more when they watch more TV
It was rapidly adopted in the US:
1950 -10% had TVs
1959 - 90% had TVs
Average American watches 4 hours per day (maybe a
little less); still consumes about 40% of American’s free
time
108. Figure 56: Screens Proliferate in American Homes:
VCRs, PCs, Extra TV Sets, and the Net, 1970-1999
109. Figure 57: TV Becomes an American
Habit, as Selective Viewing Declines
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
1979 1985 1989 1993
I Have the TV on Only If
I'm actually Watching It
I Turn the TV on Only If I
Want to Watch a
Specific Program
Habitual viewing is as
detrimental to civic engagement
as is watching TV at all (turning
it on in the background)
110. Figure 58: Channel Surfing Is More
Common Among Younger Generations
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
1909-1945 1946-1964 1965-1980
FractionWhoareChannelSurfers
Channel surfers watch more TV; more habitual viewers
111. Figure 59: America Watches TV All Day
Every Day
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
AdultsWatchingTelevision
Just Background
Mainly Entertainment
Mainly Information
112. Figure 60: In the Evening Americans, Above
All, Watch TV
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Which of These Things Do You Do Most Weeknights after
Your Evening Meal and before Bedtime?
113. Figure 61: More TV Means Less Civic Engagement
(Among College-Educated, Working-Age Adults)
114. Figure 62: TV Watching and Volunteering
Don’t Go Together
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Definitely
Disagree
Generally
Disagree
Moderately
Disagree
Moderately
Agree
Generally
Agree
Definitely
Agree
Volunteered(TimesLastYear)
TV Is My Primary Form of Entertainment
115. Figure 63: TV Watchers Don’t Keep in Touch
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Definitely
Disagree
Generally
Disagree
Moderately
Disagree
Moderately
Agree
Generally
Agree
Definitely
Agree
NumberofLettersWrittento
FriendsandRelativesLastYear
TV Is My Primary Form of Entertainment
116. Figure 64: TV Watching and Club Meetings
Don’t Go Together
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Definitely
Disagree
Generally
Disagree
Moderately
Disagree
Moderately
Agree
Generally
Agree
Definitely
Agree
ClubMeetingsLastYear
TV Is My Primary Form of Entertainment
117. Figure 65: TV Watching and Churchgoing
Don’t Go Together
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Definitely
Disagree
Generally
Disagree
Moderately
Disagree
Moderately
Agree
Generally
Agree
Definitely
Agree
AnnualChurchAttendance
TV Is My Primary Form of Entertainment
118. Figure 66: TV Watching and Comity Don’t
Go Together
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
Definitely
Disagree
Generally
Disagree
Moderately
Disagree
Moderately
Agree
Generally
Agree
Definitely
Agree
MeanTimesLastYear
TV Is My Primary Form of Entertainment
Gave Finger to Another
Driver
Worked on Community
Project
119. Television and Civic Engagement
How does television so substantially reduce civic
engagement?
Competes for scarce time
Has psychological effects that inhibit social participation
Programmatic content on television undermines civic
motivations
TV viewers are anchored at home and are
“homebodies”
One hour less viewing TV is the equivalent of five or
six more years of education on civic engagement
Can be addictive; people are unwilling to give it up
This is despite the fact that it is less satisfying than
other activities, including work!
120. Figure 67: Americans Began Cocooning in
the 1970s
-40 -20 0 20 40 60
Spending Time at home
Watching TV
Reading Books
Visiting with Friends or Relatives Who Live
Quite Nearby
Entertaining Friends at Home
Eating out at Restaurants
Visiting with Friends or Relatives Who Do Not
Live Nearby
Going out to Places of Public Entertainment
Which of These Activities Are You Doing More Now than You Used To?
Which Are you Doing Less Now than You Used To?
121. Figure 68: TV Watchers Don’t Feel So Great
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
RankHighonReported
headaches,Indigestion,and
Sleeplessness
TV Is My Primary Form of Entertainment
Why so much TV? Not it’s pleasures but its minimal costs…
122. Figure 69: Types of Television Programs and Civic
Engagement, Controlling for Time Spent Watching TV
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
ProbabilityofatLeastOneCivic
Activity
News Programs
Daytime Television
Does the type of TV
you watch matter?
123. Chapter 14: From Generation to Generation
So, TV is a culprit…
But, even those who don’t watch much TV are less likely
to be civically engaged
This suggest something else, like inter-generational
decline
While this is, in a sense, an explanation, isn’t it just moving the
explanation one step back?
What caused the change in younger generations?
Until you explain this, all you’ve done is pushed it back one step
So, the real question is: Why the decline between
generations? Decline in civic
engagement
Something
causes decline
????
Decline in civic
engagement
Intergeneration
al decline
Something
causes decline
????
125. Table 3. All Forms of Civic Disengagement
Are Concentrated in Younger Cohorts
activities Years 18-
29
30-44 45-
59
60+
Read newspaper daily
1972-75 49% 72% 78% 76
%
1996-98 21% 34% 53% 69
%
Relative change -57 -52 -31 -10
Attend church weekly
1973-74 36% 43% 47% 48
%
1997-98 25% 32% 37% 47
%
Relative change -30 -25 -22 -3
Signed petition
1973-74 42% 42% 34% 22
%
1993-94 23% 30% 31% 22
126. Table 3. All Forms of Civic Disengagement
Are Concentrated in Younger Cohorts
Activities Years 18-
29
30-44 45-
59
60+
Union member
1973-74 15% 18% 19% 10
%
1993-94 5% 10% 13% 6%
Relative change -64 -41 -32 -42
Attended public meeting
1973-74 19% 34% 23% 10
%
1993-94 8% 17% 15% 8%
Relative change -57 -50 -34 -21
Wrote congressman
1973-74 13% 19% 19% 14
%
1993-94 7% 12% 14% 12
%
127. Table 3. All Forms of Civic Disengagement
Are Concentrated in Younger Cohorts
Activities Years 18-
29
30-44 45-
59
60+
Officer or committee member of local
organization
1973-74 13% 21% 17% 10
%
1993-94 6% 10% 10% 8%
Relative change -53 -53 -41 -24
Wrote letter to newspaper
1973-74 6% 6% 5% 4%
1993-94 3% 5% 5% 4%
Relative change -49 -18 -9 -4
Worked for political party
1973-74 5% 7% 7% 5%
1993-94 2% 3% 4% 3%
Relative change -64 -59 -49 -36
128. Table 3. All Forms of Civic Disengagement
Are Concentrated in Younger Cohorts
Activities Years 18-
29
30-44 45-
59
60+
Ran for or held public office
1973-74 .6% 1.5% .9% .6%
1993-94 .3% .8% .8% .5%
Relative change -43 -49 -8 -22
Took part in any of twelve different
forms of civic life*
1973-74 56% 61% 54% 37
%
1993-94 31% 42% 42% 33
%
Relative change -44 -31 -22 -11
*Wrote Congress, wrote letter to editor, wrote magazine article, gave speech, attended rally, attended
public meeting, worked for political party, served as officer or as committee member of local
organization, signed petition, ran for office, and/or belonged to good-government organization.
129. Figure 71a: Generational Trends in Civic
Engagement (Education Held Constant)
The Long Civic
Generation
The Post
Civic
Generatio
n
130. Figure 71b: Generational Trends in Civic
Engagement (Education Held Constant)
The Long
Civic
Generation
The question is: What is it about this generation that increased
and maintained their civic engagement?
The Post
Civic
Generatio
n
131. Other characteristics of disengagers…
Baby boomers disengaged from political life
But also were:
Slow to marry and quick to divorce
More likely to leave religions
Less loyal to particular companies
Less comfortable in bureaucracies
Greater emphasis on individualism and tolerance for diversity
Less respect for authority, religion, and patriotism
More self-centered
More materialistic
More comfortable on their own
Less moralistic about drug use
More open-minded about race, sex, and political minorities
Good? Bad?
132. Baby Boomers vs. Generation X
Is the decline in civic engagement the fault of baby
boomers (1946-1964) or of Generation X (1965-1980)?
What about Generation Y (1980~2000)?
Coming with these declines are:
Increases in depression and suicide
Depression strikers earlier and more pervasively in each
generation since the 1940s
Born before 1955 – 1% suffered depression by 75
Born after 1955 – 6% suffered depression by 24
Between 1950 and 1995 suicide rate among 15-19 year olds
more than quadrupled; tripled for young adults just older
Sound familiar?
Durkheim and social connectedness anyone?
Typical American teenager spends 3.5 hours alone every day;
fewer friends; more fluid friendships
133. Figure 72: Greed Trumps Community
Among College Freshmen, 1966-1998
How would you respond?
135. Figure 74: Growing Generation Gap in
Malaise (Headaches, Insomnia, Indigestion)
136. Limitations of This Explanation
The following are almost entirely attributable to
generational changes:
Church attendance, voting, political interest, campaign
activities, associational membership, and social trust
Schmoozing activities are not generational: they
have declined in all age groups
Card playing, dinners with friends, club meetings, dining
with family, neighboring, bowling, picnicking, visiting with
friends, and sending greeting cards
137. What lies behind the changes?
So, generational declines exist
But what causes them?
P. 268 “Of men born in the 1920s, nearly 80% served in the
military.”
Could this be an ingroup/outgroup solidarity issue?
Having put your life on the line for your ingroup, you value them
more?
Advertising and the media encouraged solidarity (recycling steel
and rubber for the war effort; buying war bonds)
When was the last time you saw the media encourage solidarity? (Iraq?)
Being united behind a common cause leads to greater social
solidarity and more civic engagement.
But extended periods of conflict with an outgroup can lead to
backlashes
Do we have a common cause in the US today? Do we have
anything to bring people together?
What might do this?
How can YOU change the world?
138. Figure 75: From Generation to Generation, Patriotism
Wanes, Materialism Waxes
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Patriotism Money Self-fulfillment
SayValueIs“VeryImportant”
Born before 1934
Born 1934-1948
Born 1949-1968
Born after 1968
139. Figure 76: Materialism Grows in the Final
Decades of the Twentieth Century
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
PercentofAdultsnamingValueAspartof“theGoodLife”
Happy Marriage
Children
Material Luxuries
A Lot of Money
Job That contributes to Society
2 per. Mov. Avg. (Job That contributes
to Society)
140. Figure 77: The Meaning of Community for
Successive Generations
141. Chapter 15: What Killed Civic Engagement?
Summing Up
Another possible explanation – high divorce rates
and decline in nuclear family
P. 278 “Americans who are married and those with
children are much more likely to be involved in
religious activities, including church
membership, church attendance, and church-related
social activities.”
However, divorce is unrelated to civic engagement
No direct evidence for declining nuclear family
leading to less civic engagement
Maybe a cause for concern for other reasons, but not for
civic engagement
142. Other causes?
Not racial progress
Not big government
Globalization?
Maybe, but not a direct link between globalization and
hanging out with friends
143. Figure 78: Government Spending, 1947-1998: State
and Local Government Up, National Defense Down
144. Figure 79: Guesstimated Explanation for
Civic Disengagement, 1965-2000
Work
10% Sprawl
10%
Other?
17%
TV
12%
TV Generation
13%
Generational
Change
38%
145. Causal Model
Decline in Civic
Engagement
Generational
Change
TV Generation
(both combined)
TV
Work
Sprawl
Other?
Change in culture
and society
TV Generation
(both combined)
Technological
innovation
Lower real wages;
higher desired
standard of living
Technology; cars; poor
urban planning; desire
for space
Other?
What caused all of
these to change?
147. Chapter 16: Introduction
Are there “good old days”?
Maybe if you are the descendent of aristocracy
Otherwise, they are more mythical than anything else
Think about your “good old days”…
Okay, so, benefits of social capital
1) allows citizens to resolve collective problems more easily
How? Why?
Government resolves lots of problems we would have a hard time managing on
our own
2) greases the wheels that allow communities to advance smoothly
Trust is key to societal development
3) widening our awareness of the many ways in which our fates are linked
Why is this important?
4) operates through psychological and biological processes to improve
individuals’ lives
How? Why?
To illustrate this, he creates a social capital index…
148. Table 4: Measuring Social Capital in the
American States
Components of Comprehensive Social Capital Index Correlation with
Index
Measures of community organizational life
Served on committee of local organization in last year (percent) 0.88
Served as officer of some club or organization in last year
(percent)
0.83
Civic and social organizations per 1,000 population 0.78
Mean number of club meetings attended in last year 0.78
Mean number of group memberships 0.74
Measures of engagement in public affairs
Turnout in presidential elections, 1988 and 1992 0.84
Attended public meeting on town or school affairs in last year
(percent)
0.77
149. Table 4: Measuring Social Capital in the
American States
Components of Comprehensive Social Capital Index Correlation with
Index
Measures of community volunteerism
Number of nonprofit (501[c]3) organizations per 1,000
population
0.82
Mean number of times worked on community project in last
year
0.65
Mean number of times did volunteer work in last year 0.66
Measures of informal sociability
Agree that “I spend a lot of time visiting friends” 0.73
Mean number of times entertained at home in last year 0.67
Measures of social trust
Agree that “Most people can be trusted” 0.92
Agree that “Most people are honest” 0.84
150. Figure 80: Social Capital in the American
States
Notice any
patterns here?
151. Chapter 17: Education and Children’s
Welfare
Well, there are some specific positives that are likely
tied to social capital, for instance…
P. 296 “Social capital keeps bad things from
happening to good kids.”
How? Why?
To illustrate, he creates a Kids Count Index of Child
Welfare and then contrasts that with his social capital
index
P. 297 “…social capital is second only to poverty in
the breadth and depth of its effects on children’s
lives.”
152. Table 5: Kids Count Index of Child Welfare
Percent of low-birth-weight babies
Infant mortality rate (deaths per 1,000 live births)
Child death rate (deaths per 100,000 children ages 1-14)
Deaths per 100,000 teens ages 15-19 by accident, homicide, and suicide
Teen birth rate (births per 1,000 females ages 15-17)
Percent of teens who are high school dropouts (ages 16-19)
Juvenile violent crime arrest rate (arrests per 100,000 youths ages 10-17)
Percent of teens not attending school and not working (ages 16-19)
Percent of children in poverty
Percent of families with children headed by a single parent
What does this index tell us?
153. Figure 81: Kids Are Better Off in High-
Social-Capital States
155. Figure 83: Kids Watch Less TV in High-
Social-Capital States
156. Chapter 18: Safe and Productive
Neighborhoods
P. 308 “Higher levels of social capital, all else being
equal, translate into lower levels of crime.”
This may explain higher rates of violent crime in the
South – lower levels of social capital.
159. Chapter 19: Economic Prosperity
What about simply making more money?
P. 319 “People who grow up in well-to-do families
with economically valuable social ties are more likely
to succeed in the economic marketplace, not merely
because they tend to be richer and better
educated, but also because they can and will ply
their connections. Conversely, individuals who grow
up in socially isolated rural and inner-city areas are
held back, not merely because they tend to be
financially and educationally deprived, but also
because they are relatively poor in social ties that
can provide a “hand up.””
160. Economic Prosperity
Helps people find jobs:
85% of young men used personal networks to find
employment
54-58% use state agencies and newspapers
P. 323 “In areas where residents vote, sustain vibrant
neighborhood associations, feel attached to their
neighborhood, and see it as a good place to
live, other people want to move in, and housing
values therefore remain comparatively high.”
Why?
161. Chapter 20: Health and Happiness
Social capital also translates into health
P. 326 “The more integrated we are with our community,
the less likely we are to experience colds, heart attacks,
strokes, cancer, depression, and premature death of all
sorts. Such protective effects have been confirmed for
close family ties, for friendship networks, for participation
in social events, and even for simple affiliation with
religious and other civic associations. In other words,
both machers and schmoozers enjoy these remarkable
health benefits.”
Why?
Tangible assistance, emotional support, reinforce healthy
norms, organize for first-rate medical service
Creates another index to capture health and contrast it
with social capital
162. Table 6: Which State Has the Best Health
and Health Care?
Morgan-Quitno Healthiest State Rankings (1993-1998):
1. Births of low birth weight as a percent of all births (-
)
12. Estimated rate of new cancer cases (-)
2. Births to teenage mothers as a percent of live
births (-)
13. AIDS rate (-)
3. Percent of mothers receiving late or no prenatal
care (-)
14. Sexually transmitted disease rate (-)
4. Death rate (-) 15. Percent of population lacking access to primary
care (-)
5. Infant mortality rate (-) 16. Percent of adults who are binge drinkers (-)
6. Estimated age adjusted death rate by cancer (-) 17. Percent of adults who smoke (-)
7. Death rate by suicide (-) 18. Percent of adults overweight (-)
8. Percent of population not covered by health
insurance (-)
19. Days in past month when physical health was
“not good” (-)
9. Change in percent of population uninsured (-) 20. Community hospitals per 1,000 square miles (+)
10. Health care expenditures as percent of gross
state product (-)
21. Beds in community hospitals per 100,000
population (+)
11. Per capita personal health expenditures (-) 22. Percent of children aged 19-35 months fully
immunized (+)
164. Figure 86b: Health Is Better in High-Social-
Capital States
p. 331 “As a rule of
thumb, if you belong
to no groups but
decide to join one,
you cut your risk of
dying over the next
year in half. If you
smoke and belong
to no groups, it’s a
toss-up statistically
whether you should
stop smoking or
start joining.”
165. Figure 87: Americans Don’t Feel As healthy
As We Used To
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Agree“IAminGoodPhysical
Condition”
Is this necessarily the result of declining social capital?
166. Figure 88: Social Connectedness (at Least in
Moderation) Fosters Happiness
167. Social Connectedness
Do you have to go a lot of meetings to get the health
benefits of social capital?
No, diminishing returns once you are somewhat active
About once a month is just about as good as more
often than that
168. Chapter 21: Democracy
P. 336 “The ideal of participatory democracy has deep
roots in American political philosophy. With our
experiment in democracy still in its infancy, Thomas
Jefferson proposed amending the Constitution to
facilitate grassroots democracy. In an 1816 letter he
suggested that “counties be divided into wards of such
size that every citizen can attend, when called on, and
act in person.” The ward governments would have been
charged with everything from running schools to caring
for the poor to operating police and military forces to
maintaining public roads. Jefferson believed that
“making every citizen an acting member of the
government, and in the offices nearest and most
interesting to him, will attach him by his strongest feelings
to the independence of his country, and its republican
constitution.”
Do you buy it?
Would this work today?
169. Democracy
When fewer people are involved, those who remain
are more polarized and extreme
Does this seem accurate of politics today?
170. Figure 89: Tax Evasion Is Low Where Social
Capital Is High
171. Chapter 22: The Dark Side of Social Capital
Social capital has a lot of benefits, but can also have
some drawbacks
Uses another index to illustrate this…
172. Table 7: Indexes of Tolerance for Racial
Integration, Gender Equality, and Civil Liberties
A. Tolerance for racial integration (whites only)
1. White people have a right to keep [Negroes/blacks/African Americans] out of
their neighborhoods if they want to, and [Negroes/blacks/African Americans]
should respect that right. (agree/disagree)
2. Do you think there should be laws against marriages between
[Negroes/blacks/African Americans] and whites? (yes/no)
3. During the last few years, has anyone in your family brought a friend who
was a [Negro/black/African American] home for dinner? (yes/no)
4. Suppose there is a community-wide vote on the general housing issue.
There are two possible laws to vote on. One law says that a homeowner can
decide for himself whom to sell his house to, even if he prefers not to sell to
[Negroes/blacks/African Americans]; the second law says that a homeowner
cannot refuse to sell to someone because of his or her race or color. Which
law would you vote for?
5. If your party nominated a [Negro/black/African American] for president, would
you vote for him if he were qualified for the job? (yes/no)
6. If you and your friends belonged to a social club that would not let
[Negroes/blacks/African Americans] join, would you try to change the rules so
173. Table 7: Indexes of Tolerance for Racial Integration,
Gender Equality, and Civil Liberties
B. Tolerance for feminism
1. Women should take care of running their homes and leave running the
country up to men. (agree/disagree)
2. Do you approve or disapprove of a married woman earning money in
business or industry if she has a husband capable of supporting her?
(approve/disapprove)
3. If your party nominated a woman for president, would you vote for her if she
were qualified for the job? (yes/no)
4. Most men are better suited emotionally for politics than are most women.
(agree/disagree)
5. It is much better for everyone involved if the man is the achiever outside the
home and the woman takes care of the home and family. (agree/disagree)
174. Table 7: Indexes of Tolerance for Racial Integration,
Gender Equality, and Civil Liberties
C. Tolerance for civil liberties
1. There are always some people whose ideas are considered bad or
dangerous by other people. For instance, someone who is against all churches
and religion. If such a person wanted to make a speech in your community
against churches and religion, should he be allowed to speak or not?
2. If some people in your community suggested that a book he wrote against
churches and religion should be taken out of your public library, would you
favor removing this book or not?
This same pair of questions was also posed about:
-a person who believes that blacks are genetically inferior
-a man who admits that he is a Communist
-a person who advocates doing away with elections and letting the military run
the country
-a man who admits that he is a homosexual
175. Figure 90: Tolerance Grows for Racial Integration,
Civil Liberties, and Gender Equality
Tolerance increased while civic engagement decreased. Why?
Those
who are
more
civically
engaged
are more
tolerant.
176. Table 8: Social Capital and Tolerance: Four
Types of Society
Low Social Capital High Social Capital
High tolerance (1) Individualistic: you do
your thing, and I’ll do
mine
(3) Civic community
(Salem without
“witches”)
Low tolerance (2) Anarchic: War of all
against all
(4) Sectarian community
(in-group vs. out-group;
Salem with “witches”)
Theoretically possible types of societies – tolerance by social capital:
181. Chapter 23: Lessons of History: The Gilded
Age and the Progressive Era
There have been other periods in America’s history when
social capital was ebbing and inequality was growing – The
Gilded Age
The response was the Progressive Era – people joined
together to form groups and enact legislation to increase
equality
The problem:
P. 378 “Social reformers in the Progressive Era were caught in the
horns of a dilemma. In social service, in public health, in urban
design, in education, in neighborhood organization, in cultural
philanthropy, even in lobbying, professional staff could often do a
more effective, more efficient job in the task at hand than “well-
meaning” volunteers. However, disempowering ordinary members
of voluntary associations could easily diminish grassroots civic
engagement and foster oligarchy. Progressives struggled with
themselves over the choice between professionalism and
grassroots democracy, though in the end professionalism would
win out.”
182. Modernization
P. 380 “In great cities men are brought together by
the desire of gain. They are not in a state of co-
operation, but of isolation, as to the making of
fortunes: and for all the rest they are careless of
neighbours. Christianity teaches us to love our
neighbour as ourself; modern society acknowledges
no neighbour.”
You agree?
Can we go back to a period before large cities and
capitalism?
Would you want to?
183. Figure 94: Associational Density in Twenty-
six American Communities, 1840-1940
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
1840 1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940
Associationsper1,000Population
184. Figure 95: Founding and Cumulative
Incidence of Large Membership Associations
185. Table 9: Social Capital Innovations, 1870-
1920
Organization Founding date
National Rifle Association 1871
Shriners 1872
Chautauqua Institute 1874
American Bar Association 1878
Salvation Army (U.S.) 1880
American Red Cross 1881
American Association of University Women 1881
Knights of Columbus 1882
American Federation of Labor 1886
International Association of Machinists [and later Aerospace
Workers]
1888
Loyal Order of Moose 1888
Women’s Missionary Union (Southern Baptist) 1888
Hull House (other settlement houses founded within a few
years)
1889
186. Table 9: Social Capital Innovations, 1870-
1920
Organization Founding date
General Federation of Women’s Clubs 1890
United Mine Workers 1890
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers 1891
International Longshoremen’s Association 1892
Sierra Club 1892
National Council of Jewish Women 1893
National Civic League 1894
American Bowling Congress 1895
Sons of Norway 1895
American Nurses Association 1896
Volunteers of America 1896
Irish-American Historical Society 1897
Parent-Teacher Association (originally National Congress of
Mothers)
1897
187. Table 9: Social Capital Innovations, 1870-
1920
Organization Founding date
Fraternal Order of Eagles 1898
Gideon Society 1899
Veterans of Foreign Wars 1899
National Consumers League 1899
International Ladies Garment Workers Union 1900
4-H 1901
Aid Association of Lutherans 1902
Goodwill Industries 1902
National Farmers Union 1902
Big Brothers 1903
International Brotherhood of Teamsters 1903
Sons of Poland 1903
National Audubon Society 1905
188. Table 9: Social Capital Innovations, 1870-
1920
Organization Founding date
Rotary 1905
Sons of Italy 1905
Boys Clubs of America 1906
YWCA 1906
Big Sisters 1908
NAACP 1909
American Camping Association 1910
Boy Scouts 1910
Campfire Girls 1910
Urban League 1910
Girl Scouts 1912
Hadassah 1912
Community Chest (later United Way) 1913
189. Table 9: Social Capital Innovations, 1870-
1920
Organization Founding date
Community foundations (Cleveland, Boston, Los Angeles, etc.) 1914-15
American Association of University Professors 1915
Junior Chamber of Commerce (Jaycees) 1915
Kiwanis 1915
Ku Klux Klan (second) 1915
Women’s International Bowling Congress 1916
Civitan 1917
Lions Club 1917
American Legion 1919
Optimists 1919
Business and Professional Women (BPW) 1919
American Civil Liberties Union 1920
American Farm Bureau Federation 1920
League of Women Voters 1920
190. Figure 96: Founding Dates of Contemporary
U.S. Associations
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
1790s
1800s
1810s
1820s
1830s
1840s
1850s
1860s
1870s
1880s
1890s
1900s
1910s
1920s
1930s
1940s
1950s
1960s
1970s
1980s
1990s
Frequency
What does this
suggest?
191. What to do?
P. 401 “my message is that we desperately need an era
of civic inventiveness to create a renewed set of
institutions and channels for a reinvigorated civic life that
will fit the way we have come to live. Our challenge now
is to reinvent the twenty-first-century equivalent of the
Boy Scouts or the settlement house or the playground or
Hadasseh or the united Mine Workers or the NAACP.
What we create may well look nothing like the institutions
Progressives invented a century ago, just as their
inventions were not carbon copies of the earlier small-
town folkways whose passing they mourned. We need to
be as ready to experiment as the Progressives were.
Willingness to err – and then correct our aim – is the
price of success in social reform.”
Thoughts on how to accomplish this?
Do you think it would work?
192. Chapter 24: Toward an Agenda for Social
Capital
Areas where something can be done:
Youth and schools
P. 404 “Let us find ways to ensure that by 2010 the level of civic
engagement among Americans then coming of age in all parts of our
society will match that of their grandparents when they were that same
age, and that at the same time bridging social capital will be substantially
greater than it was in their grandparents’ era.”
The workplace
P. 406 “Let us find ways to ensure that by 2010 America’s workplace will
be substantially more family-friendly and community-congenial, so that
American workers will be enabled to replenish our stocks of social capital
both within and outside the workplace.”
Urban and metropolitan design
Pp. 407-408 “Let us act to ensure that by 2010 Americans will spend less
time traveling and more time connecting with our neighbors than we do
today, that we will live in more integrated and pedestrian-friendly
areas, and that the design of our communities and the availability of public
space will encourage more casual socializing with friends and neighbors.”
193. Chapter 24: Toward an Agenda for Social
Capital
Areas where something can be done:
Religion
P. 409 “Let us spur a new, pluralistic, socially responsible “great
awakening,” so that by 2010 Americans will be more deeply engaged than
we are today in one or another spiritual community of meaning, while at
the same time becoming more tolerant of the faiths and practices of other
Americans.”
(I don’t buy this; don’t see it as plausible…)
Arts and culture
P. 410 “Let us find ways to ensure that by 2010 Americans will spend less
leisure time sitting passively alone in front of glowing screens and more
time in active connection with our fellow citizens. Let us foster new forms
of electronic entertainment and communication that reinforce community
engagement rather than forestalling it.”
Politics and government
P. 411 “Let us find ways to ensure that by 2010 significantly more
Americans will participate in (not merely consumer or “appreciate”)
cultural activities from group dancing to songfests to community theater to
rap festivals. Let us discover new ways to use the arts as a vehicle for
convening diverse groups of fellow citizens.”
194. Conclusion
P. 412 “Let us find ways to ensure that by 2010
many more Americans will participate in the public
life of our communities – running for office, attending
public meetings, serving on
committees, campaigning in elections, and even
voting.”
Do you agree that this is a serious problem?
What can we do to solve it?
How is this sociological theory?
