While reading Steven Durlauf's response to Putnam's "Bowling Alone" entitled, "Bowling Alone: a review essay" (believe me, the contents of the paper are much more original than the title,) I came across an interesting idea I hadn't considered while reading Putnam. Durlauf has issues with Putnam's discussion of social capital, particularly the two different types, bonding and bridging. Durlauf believes that there are aspects of our lives which do both, and national identity is just that.
National identity can bridge loyalties between different ethnic groups while bonding citizens in ways that may increase hostility towards foreigners. Well, that was Durlauf's opinion at least. I don't know about the whole "hostility" towards foreigners. Maybe it's just my idealism peaking out through my hard, cynical outer-shell, but as a country built by foreigners, I would hope for some more welcoming attitudes.
That's not the case (that little spark of idealism faded quickly.) Attitudes towards the Hispanic and Muslim communities have gotten increasingly negative this past decade. Anti-Islam sentiments seemed to reach a boiling point last week, when Homeland Security Chairman Rep. Peter King-R began hearings on what he deemed the "Radicalization of the American Muslim Community." Reading this article: King Hearings & Anti-Muslim Hate: A Citizen's Call to Action, makes it hard for me to believe this is really the type of thing Durlauf would refer to as a type of social capital worth believing in, or even acknowledging as social capital.
No comments:
Post a Comment