Strengths and Weaknesses of the Social Capital Approach

Civil societies are voluntary social institutions and organizations that are separate from the government and the market where a community of citizens are able to come together and pursue their shared common interest. They are beneficial to the community as well as the broader society as civil societies ultimately promote progressive policies, nurture positive social norms that encourage stability, and advocates accountability and checks against state authority (Edwards 2010). Moreover, civil societies represent a third sphere of association where citizens are able to address the deficiencies that the state and market fail to handle and then have the opportunity to develop their own

Public opinion plays a huge role in the development of democracy. “A society is unlikely to maintain democratic institutions over the long term, unless democracy has solid support among the public” (Andersen 2012). Most research on the issue demonstrates a positive link between economic development and support for democracy(Andersen 2012). Some researchers also consider social trust (Putnam 1993) and social tolerance (Andersen and Fetner 2008) to be a major factor of support of democracy. Most Americans see unequal economy as a result of individuals work ethics and talent rather then a flaw in the economic system. However, most Americans accept inequality because they believe everyone has the same chances in life to make the best. A properly running government is supposed to make positive that all the citizen are equal. By believing in equal democratic rights Americans support everyone citizen having the same level of equality and the same equal voice in representative government. Since citizens don’t feel that they can trust the government to create and equal ground for all they are much less likely to be involve and participate in political field. Concerned citizens have the right to be worried about the health of our democracy. It seems that the government resounds more often and effectively to the more privileged group in society then to needs of the

In Chapter four, Citizen’s Participation, Hudson addresses, one of the greatest worries in the present day American vote based system is the absence of political hobby and support that has expanded following the 1960s. Most political researchers concur with the thought that a sound majority rule government needs a solid measure of support and political adequacy; be that as it may, the huge verbal confrontation includes realizing what is the sum important to be viewed as "solid". Some political researchers trust the hypothesis, in which normal American 's absence of interest is in compelling damage for our popular government. All things considered, there are another gathering of political researchers that are in the camp that trusts that equitable interest is too high, with the approach of political promotion gatherings campaigning government officials, the country has made a gridlock where such a large number of thoughts are in the coliseum, that this nation can 't achieve an agreement any longer. The writer of the book, Hudson, concurs with the first hypothesis that our absence of investment is destructive, and I agree with Hudson, wholeheartedly. The absence of association in the American political procedure, that is at present being

Robert Putnam's basic thesis is that there is a decline in civic engagement in urban cities. He goes on to explore different probable factors that are causing the decline in civic engagement. First off, he dichotomizes civic engagement into two categories: machers and schmoozers. Machers and schmoozers are people who engage in formal kinds of civic engagement (following politics) and informal kinds of civic engagement (hanging out with friends) respectively.

Professor Robert D. Putman spent time studying and writing about the decline in America’s social capital and civic engagement. The observations talked about in Putman’s “Bowling Alone: America’s Declining Social Capital,” have shown a decrease in community involvement and social interaction. In the twentieth century there has been noticeable declines in community involvement. Putman offers the argument that traditional interactions possibly have just been replaced by more modern versions of engagement. Whatever the case, he presents that this is leading to a fall in social capital, which provide certain issues for society. When there is an abundance of social capital in society, there is better education, better economic standing, reduced

The impact of social capital theories on methods of politics, economics, and social issues was largely unprecedented when Robert Putnam conducted his research in Italy in the 70’s and 80’s and published Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. It has since been greeted with both endorsement and disapproval, with equal validations for both sides. Authors Filippo Sabetti, The Search for Good Government: Understanding the Paradox of Italian Democracy, and Shari Berman, “Civil Society and the Collapse of the Weimar Republic”, agree that Putnam’s research was flawed, rendering his argument unsound. At a very basic level, Putnam’s argument can be surmised as believing “social context and history profoundly condition the effectiveness

Civic involvement and citizenship are common terms used interchangeably in order to describe individual responsibility in society. However, upon further evaluation, both words address different aspects of society itself. Citizenship can be understood as certain obligations, liberties, and privileges embodied by an individual; and civic involvement is the activities associated with those responsibilities. The following definition summarizes the broader scope of citizenship and civic involvement assumed in A Short History of Progress by Ronald Wright. In this book, Wright describes the progress of citizenship, and the perception that mankind gradually improves over time.

It is true that today in America, there exist four types of groups, known as “linkage” institutions that without them, a democracy would be very difficult to keep up. These institutions play a significant and important role in connecting citizens to the government, but they are not officially a part of it. These groups are the following: the political parties, which represent points of view to how the government should be run. The campaigns and elections, which remind the citizens of their greatest power– the vote. The interest groups, which organize people with common interest and attitudes to influence government to support their points of view, and the media, which play an important role in connecting people to government.

Social Capital is defined as the networks of relationships among people, enabling that society to function effectively. James Coleman’s “Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital” examines the many benefits of social capital in a society. However, most forms of social capital are public goods and do not primarily profit the person who has to bring it about. Therefore, it’s not in his interest to bring it leading to a shortage. Coleman wants to apply economics’s principle of rational action to the social perspective to increase people’s willingness to socialize. On the other hand, Alejandro Portes’s “The Two Meanings of Social Capital” challenges Coleman’s concept by arguing that people shouldn’t

When I think about a political community, I usually associate it with elections, politicians, and advertisements that bad mouth candidates from the different political parties. Politicians try to persuade citizens to vote for them by making promises that they may never fulfill. But a political community is more than that. A comparison of Aristotle and John Locke’s nature and purpose of a political community has given me a new insight. I learned that, even though the political community is responsible to provide security, its main purpose is aimed for the highest good of all its citizens, which is virtue and happiness.

In “Bowling Alone”, Robert Putnam speaks primarily of America’s declining activity in civil society and social meetings. His arguments are backed with facts in statistics- he often lists membership levels in different organizations, and how they’ve declined in a number of years by (typically) a drastic percentage. One example in the civic society portion that stood out to me was actually quite short and minor. Putnam wrote that "the portion of who reply that they “trust the government in Washington” only “some of the time” or “almost never” has risen steadily from 30 percent in 1966 to 75 percent in 1992.”(Putnam, Robert D. “Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital.” Journal of Democracy, Jan. 1995, pp. 65–78.) This was a distinct moment in the article for me because in our society today, I feel as though this percentage has probably increased in our country, especially amongst the younger generation who has

Societies can be, by definition, small associations of like minded individuals with narrow aims or large nations with broad, diverse aims. Dewey offers two standards which can be applied to assess the value of a society: How numerous and varied are the interests which are consciously shared? How full and free is the interplay with other forms of association? By applying these two questions, the natural conclusion of the ideal society is democratic, that is to say one that offers its citizens the freedom of expression and communication. If a democracy represents an ideal society that presents the maximum number of common interests and the maximum opportunities for association with other societies, then it also represents the ideal society in its potential for growth.

one essential conviction, expressed in the word democracy itself: that power should be in the hands of the people. Although democracy today has been slightly inefficient in this idea, with the wealthy, elite class challenging this right, “it nevertheless claims for itself a fundamental validity that no other kind of society shares….” To completely understand the structure of democracy, one must return to the roots of the practice itself, and examine the origins in ancient Greece, the expansion in the Roman Empire, and how these practices combined make what we recognize as today’s democratic government.

This paper will critically evaluate the methodology used in Robert Putnam’s Making Democracy Work. By relying on what the methodological arguments that were taught this semester, this paper will discuss and evaluate in detail the various methodological strategies employed by the author. For the ‘Theory’ theme, this paper will examine casual mechanisms (and methodological individualism) topic, closely referencing the course reading Social Mechanisms by Peter Hedstrom and Richard Swedbeg. Next, for the ‘Measurement and Data’ theme, this paper will specifically examine the measurement validity and reliability topic, and will closely reference “Measurement validity: A Shared Standard for qualitative and Quantitative Research” by Robert Adcock and David Colllier. Finally, for the ‘Testing Theory with Data Theory’, this paper will be examining the history as an explanation topic, closely referencing “The Study of Critical Junctures: Theory, Narrative and Counterfactuals in Historical Intuitionalism” by Giovanni Capoccia and Daniel Kelemen, as well as the relevant topic, Quantitative versus Qualitative Methods. The paper will start by summarizing the readings relevant to the topics of the themes, then delve into the pertinent methodology in Putnam’s book.

The fact that traditional societies were small in size, made possible for anyone to participate with an active and direct way in the government of his community. “Every one is urged and invited to attend public meetings, and everyone is urged to vote not as a duty but as a privilege” (Vidich: 229). In modern