Social Capital

Most political science majors hear the term “Civil Society” pretty often, but few actually appreciate the importance of the subject. Civil society refers to community involvement in non-governmental organizations that are distinct from family and business. Consider your own involvement in what you might think of as your “community:” religious groups, sports, service organizations and clubs; these are all civil society. To many who study the political world, civil society is a foundational characteristic of development and democracy. Now, I would suppose that you've never sat down and thought about your grandmother's quilting circle being a foundation for American democracy, but in many ways, it is.

De Tocqueville noted about the United States that “ Americans of all ages, all stations of life, and all types of disposition are forever forming associations... In democratic countries knowledge of how to combine is the mother of all other forms of knowledge; on its progress depends that of all the others.”* This has a lot to do with why civil society usually comes up in conversations on democratization. Many believe that the formation of civil organizations, such as grandma's quilting circle, encourage democratic tendencies. Democratic government necessarily requires community; without interpersonal association, only singular individuals can make moves and complaints against the state. This does not mean to imply that grandma's quilting circle will go out and revolt, but rather that it demonstrates a tendency within society to associate and discuss outside of the workplace and the state's authority. It is this kind of activity that demonstrates investment in society, not just business or authority; this investment is known as social capital.

Robert Putnam wrote a substantial article and book entitled “Bowling Alone,” which has become a hallmark of the argued need for social capital. His work demonstrated that the greater the investment in social capital in an area, the stronger the democracy. The title actually is somewhat of a warning to the United States; Putnam found that while many Americans still went bowling, a decreasing number were a part of bowling leagues, they were instead “bowling alone.” His work, as you will find more about on the website www.bowlingalone.com , warns of the loss of social capital in the US.

Few actually disagree with the desire for social capital in the democratization process, though there is some division on its importance compared with other issues. Furthermore, many now wonder about the way technology will influence the subject. While it was once the case that to talk casually with a friend a reason and means to get together was needed, now, the internet allows conversation around the globe in seconds or less. What does it mean that a Chinese peasant could discuss life with a French industrialist? Does this in some way negate the need for, or change the nature of, civil society? It is likely that we will not be able to answer this question any time soon; though, we can speculate and study to try to find the way that the changing world will change what we know about social capital.
-Mike Ryckman

*De Tocqueville, Alexis. Democracy in America , found at http://www.tocqueville.org/chap5.htm