Week 2 (January 28, 2009) 
Civil Society, Social capital, & "virtual" communities    
diagram
Putnam, Robert. 1996.  The Strange Disappearance of Civic America
London, Scott. 2000.  Civic Networks: Building Community on the Net
Boyd, Danah. 2006. Facebook's Privacy Trainwreck: Exposure, Invasion, Drama.
                                                                                                                             

Review: overview of different trends & theories of why  citizens are less politically engaged
   - What are the causes for the "disconnect"?   How serious is it?

   -elite vs participatory models of democracy
   - Is the divide between "red" & "blue" real or exaggerated?
   - What should/could public involvement look like in a new era?

tonight: impact on changes in traditional institutions & the break-down of traditional communities on  political socialization & engagement.

Does the movement towards the internet reinforce or weaken community bonds? Or both? If civil society is the foundation of civic involvement, how do we restore community bonds in a virtual world?

Central Problem: diminishing of "social capital" in civil society
    defn. voluntary social networks connected by mutual trust and norms of reciprocity (community)
   - cultural base of all political action towards govt. and policymakers- civil society
Social Capital Community Survey

Putnam article: issue of very serious concern
    **. primary cause of citizen gap, dis-connect w/ government and politics
         - (most pronounced w/ under 30 age group)

Why?
  A. Break-down and changes in traditional "socializing" institutions

  1. family

     a. model for relationship w/ authority
       1. learn to trust, question, contribute to decisions
       2. "Leave it to Beaver" model, traditionally
       3. respect for authority & trust transfers to institutions w/ maturity

   b.contemporary family structures more unstable
      1. divorce rates increased since 1970's
      2. media encourages cynicism/disrespect  toward parents    images
      3. cynicism and distrust, transfer over to political figures

2. Schools (form and content)
  a.  microcosm of larger political community
     1. opportunities for citizenship, service available
     2. ideally, students can shape policy, laws, develop efficacy
  b. experiential learning is model for later political behavior

 c.content of democracy taught through curriculum/ civic knowledge
   1. the institutional arrangements of government
   2. history and philosophy of democratic theory
   3. importance of political involvement

 d. crisis in schools, currently
   1. fewer teaching adequate civic knowledge
 
   2. stretched too thin
      a. taking on "family" functions not equipped to handle
      b.  budget cuts hurt curriculum development
   3. policing & security concerns more serious
      a. Columbine aftermath
      b. 'zero tolerance' drug policies

e.  Result-  more arbitrary and authoritarian policies
   1. increased police presence in schools
   2. more totalitarian atmosphere
   3. higher levels of  student aliena
tion,  lack of efficacy
   4. translates into disillusionment w/ policies, boredom,
            a. "disconnect" 
            b. perception of being manipulated

3. Political Parties
   a. role is to organize coalitions of diverse groups towards policy consensus
     1. platforms reflect member's views
     2. incorporate & focus political goals of many groups-  "Big tent" model

   b. sense of political/community identity for members
     1. connection w/ local issues, personalities, policies, "bottom-up" structure
     2. traditionally, state, county-based, weak national parties
     3. strength based upon personal contact, relationships, traditionally

  c. party structures transformed since 1970's
    1. membership dropping
    2. more Americans identify as "independent", than Dem. or  Rep.
    3. national stronger,  state weaker
      a. changes in campaign-finance laws, post-Watergate
        1. creation of PAC's  (political action committees)
        2. possibility of "soft" money
          a. "candidate-centered" elections, not party-centered
          b. natl parties managers of money
      b. party id now more ideological label than membership in organization
 
  4. two mainstream parties fight for center
     a. many citizens see no  real "choice"   "Tweedledum & Tweedledumber"
     b. third parties operate w/ serious structural disadvantages, little media attention

4. Local Communities
  a. voluntary associations form base of civil society-the "public"
    1. interaction among ppl  w/ diverse personalities and beliefs
    2. united by geography, local concerns
    3. basis for collective action

 b. Putnam's "bowling alone" phenomenon
   1. breakdown of  traditional social networks
     a. women in labor market
     b. mobility of citizens, anonymity of "burbs"
     c. less neighbor-to-neighbor contact
     d. longer working hours

 2. no "public" to mobilize on issues, only "privates"
    a. public engagement brings very different ppl together- interaction results in understanding other perspectives 
    b. if no "public" space to deliberate w/ others, open-ness to manipulation by "experts" 

 3. primary problem: communication technology--television
   a. distraction from interpersonal  contact, community activity
     1. "opiate of the masses"
        --"800 lb gorilla of leisure time"
     2. co-opts much private time
     3. personal isolation from REAL to involvement w/ simulated characters
        -- "ppl don't have friends, they watch them on TV"

     4. encourages passivity, isolation, detachment
     5. cable has only increased the  fragmentation of "real" community into market niches of private interests
 
    b. What will be impact of internet?
        1. NEGATIVE: (Putnam): the internet will continue trend from public involvement to private isolation

           a. substitution of ppl-based community for virtual

                  1. chat lines, internet groups, listservs- only simulate community
              2. distraction from local politics to more distant, abstract issues

              3. diminishing of belief in "local competence"  wow

             4.
 worst case- lost in virtual world, absence from "real" one
Everquest   Sims    sims-acc    
          
               b. Boyd article details some of confusion of virtual networking
                    1. confusion of public & private (concern for exposure, invasion)
                    2. unnecessary info you don't need to know, uncomfortable to know (invisible audiences)
                    3. ppl assume they know you better than they do
                    4. ppl also construct new identities, new ways to perform
                       a. often easier than in person-person
                       b. makes up for structural disadvantages, eg. health, geography, shyness, etc.
                   5. also, easier to mis-represent your self   ex

one scenario:    
    a. continued diminishment in civil society
              1. personal isolation and alienation increases (anomie)
              2. removal of public presence in policymaking
              3. very dangerous to participatory democracy  ideal arrangement

   b. trend is likely to get worse w/o serious resistance
             1. must work to re-create  local community, geographically-rooted
             2. deliberate turn away from digital interaction  to real local individuals
             3. public policy focus- create public "spaces"

scenario 2:

    POSITIVE: (London)  internet will create new forms of community 
        
         a. TV encourages passivity-,  internet forces interactivity
         b. in globalized, decentralized world--dispersed community is all we will have, (facebook,  myspace )

           c.reconceptualize community to take in new fragmented  world  
          d. more rapid interactions, larger base pool to draw from - larger community kiva

       e. promise & value in virtual community
              1. not limited by time, geography, or physical barriers   ge
              2. allows for easy mobilization of actors
              3. anyone can be author, not passive audience
              4. potentially closer contact w/ public officials and policymaking wi    
on-line govt.
      
      f. net activism shows real potential  (Obama campaign excelled,)

          1. useful alliances not possible w/o  its networking potential   meet-ups
              a. unites those w/ common concerns, geographically separated  vm
              b. shared strategies from communities to communities  NRA  Wisconsin Stewardship Network

3rd scenario   (one augments the other)
:
     a.  no substitute for ppl-based community
          1. social capital cannot be created on-line
          2. works best as adjunct or augmentation  
          3. can magnify human interaction  in existing network
    b. can facilitate the combination of net-based & interpersonal interactions
         1 need to learn new rules of social interaction
         2. on-line means you lose control of audience

  c. true, diverse community cannot be replicated on-line
      1. ppl will choose blogs & websites than confirm private beliefs
      2. no opportunity to have opinions revised through exposure to other opinions