Bowling Alone

"Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital" (1995) is an essay by Robert D. Putnam. Putnam expanded it into the book "Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community" (2000, ISBN 0-7432-0304-6).

ummary

In "Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital" ("Journal of Democracy", January 1995, Volume 6, Number 1) Putnam surveys the decline of "social capital" in the United States of America since 1950, which he feels undermines the active civil engagement a strong democracy required from its citizens. Putnam discusses ways in which Americans have disengaged from political involvement including decreased voter turnout, public meeting attendance, serving on committees and working with political parties. Putnam also cites Americans' growing distrust in their government. Putnam accepts the possibility that this lack of trust could be attributed to "the long litany of political tragedies and scandals since the 1960s" (see paragraph 13 of [http://xroads.virginia.edu/~HYPER/DETOC/assoc/bowling.html the 1995 article] ), but believes that this explanation is limited when viewing it alongside other "trends in civic engagement of a wider sort" (par. 13).

Putnam notes the aggregate loss in membership of many civic organizations and points out that membership has not migrated to other organizations. To illustrate why the decline in Americans' membership in social organizations is problematic to democracy, Putnam uses bowling as an example. Although the number of people who bowl has increased in the last 20 years, the number of people who bowl in leagues has decreased. Since people bowl alone they do not participate in social interaction and civic discussions that might occur in a league environment.

Putnam then contrasts the countertrends of ever increasing mass-membership organizations, nonprofit organizations and support groups to the data of the General Social Survey. This data shows an aggregate decline in membership of traditional civic organizations, proving his thesis that the social capital of the US has declined. He then asks the obvious question "Why is US social capital eroding?" (par. 35). He believes the "movement of women into the workforce" (par. 36), the "re-potting hypothesis" (par. 37) and other demographic changes have made little impact on the number of individuals engaging in civic associations. Instead, he looks to the technological "individualizing" (par. 39) of our leisure time via television, Internet and eventually "virtual reality helmets" (par.39).

Putnam suggests closer studies of which forms of associations can create the greatest social capital, how various aspects of technology, changes in social equality, and public policy affect social capital. He closes by emphasizing the importance of discovering how the United States could reverse the trend of social capital decay.

Criticism

Putnam has been accused of perpetuating the myth that the 1950s was America's "Golden Age" despite the strife and divisions of that era, as well as problems such as racism and sexism. It has been claimed that Putnam completely ignored existing field studies, most notably the landmark sociological Middletown studies, which during the 1920s raised the same concerns he does today, except the technology being attacked as promoting isolation was radio, instead of television or video games. [ [http://www.princeton.edu/~starr/articles/articles00/Starr.Review.BowlingAlone-8-00.htm The Public Vanishes ] ] [http://www.globalpolicy.org/ngos/role/intro/def/1996/1996paradox.htm]

Likewise, Putnam expresses worries that involvement with "community groups" is in decline. However, in the Middletown studies, researchers noted that traditional neighborly ties were in decline although membership in such community groups was rising, leading to the implication that new forms of social ties emerge which are not immediately visible to the observer.

On the theoretical side, Putnam has come in for criticism on the grounds that his vision of community may offer too great a price in liberty, that it can lead to capture by fringe groups or centralised elites, and that it can actually lead to unaccountable power illegitimately infringing upon the democratic state. In particular, he has been criticized for not adequately defining his terms — one critic associated with the World Bank referred to Putnam's research and thesis as "sloppy". [ [http://poverty2.forumone.com/library/view/11852/ Poverty ] ]

ee also

*Saguaro Seminar
*Community building

Notes

References

* [http://xroads.virginia.edu/~HYPER/DETOC/assoc/bowling.html "Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital"] (1995) — complete article
*

External links

* [http://www.bowlingalone.com/ Official site]