Still Bowling Alone

Social capital is defined as the capacity of social institutions, such as families, churches, schools, or other community organizations to make an investment of attention and advice, support and concerned interest in other community members according to reformer L.J. Hanifan. As a dependent of the community social capital is applied to my everyday life. It helps me to obtain resources for my education such as scholarships, teaches me how to work together with my peers, becoming a positive role model to youth, and build trusting relationships with others in the community. Social capital is seen as a support group from leaders in the community.

Civil disobedience must always be carefully considered before it is carried out. Only with meticulous forethought will it have any positive impact. In contrast to Zinn, Hook correctly claims that minorities should only resort to civil disobedience “under carefully guarded provisions… in an effort to reeducate his fellow citizens” (Hook 18). Civil disobedience is a powerful tool for minorities when used correctly, yet can be wildly dangerous when it is not. To sum up, well controlled civil disobedience can level the gap between the majority and the minority by providing a semblance of equality to their

From reading Putnam’s article, “The Strange Disappearance of Civic America”, one thing that you can include is that social capital and civil engagement is extremely important. Social capitals include features of social life, including networks, norms and trust. These things enable participants to act together more efficiently to pursue shared. Civil engagement refers to people’s connections with the life of their communities including politics. Another thing to consider is education plays an important role in civic engagement. Education is the strongest correlate of civic engagement in all forms including social trust and membership. Effects of education have become greater as times have passed. Education also boosts civic engagement

The Civil Rights Era, or the mid-twentieth century more specifically, was a time in which great progress was made in American society for African-Americans. The progress made in this time could be conceptualized in a multitude of different ways, whether through the actions of political institutions or through the actions of proactive individuals setting out to create a more just society. While institutions are certainly important in considering the implementation of changes in society so that civil rights for African-Americans could be achieved, it is the individuals in society creating the change, whether through specific actions or assisting in changing the public’s attitudes towards such change. While there are many leaders and approaches

A great era for civil disobedience in the United States of America, would have to be the 1960’s. It was a time for figureheads, such as Rosa Parks, and Martin Luther King Jr., to sprout up and be acknowledged by history. Now known as the civil rights movement, people

While, in modern society, we can all agree that segregation and treating citizens differently based on skin or socioeconomic status is wrong and unfair, there was a time when our government did not agree with these views. In order for them to realize the mistake they were making and to be pushed to actually do something about it, peaceful protests, sit-ins, and boycotts were required. Without these protests against the government, they wouldn’t have truly heard the cries of the people and they wouldn’t have felt the need to change the laws to give everyone equal rights. Our government would have continued on, the same as usual, because they weren’t being pushed to change their ways, and we might not have had the victory found in desegregation and equal rights. Civil disobedience was required for the pain and the injustice felt by some of the nation’s most vulnerable citizens to be seen and brought to the forefront of the government’s

Most characters within books about the civil rights era have clear views on their position in regards to the movement. This novel, however, begins with the protagonist being diligently committed to the principle of civil disobedience during his efforts to acquire equal rights. As the book progressed, his views began to shift and he drifted towards a more violent way of thinking to obtain equality. The protagonist felt so strongly about the civil principle and then decided to abandon that view completely and choose the exact opposite view, violence. I thought this was intriguing because contrary to most civil rights books, I was able to see a character completely change his viewpoint during a time that most had only one opinion on civil rights and rarely changed their

In 21st century United States, the American society has continue to push the idea of social acceptance. From the mid-1900s to now, anti-racist and and anti-sexist agendas (among other things) have advocated for equal rights and representation through protesting. But now, with their ability to make an equal impact on American society, I am led to conclude that civil disobedience in the form of protesting is unacceptable due to the basic principles of the social contract and legislative representation.

In conclusion, religious participation has influenced key aspects in Americans and has suffered from the numbers of Americans losing influence of participating. Putnam’s book gives a major insight on how Americans hold the power to raise and lower rates of religious participation. The ability to give readers an insight on Americans power is a key reason as to why I would recommend Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community to others.

The importance of historical context cannot be ignored - interracial marriage, illegal barely fifty years ago, has now been accepted by the majority as just; marital rape was often deemed not a crime at all until very recently. The takeaway? A society’s moral stance is evolving, fluid and impressionable - civil disobedience is a direct path to imprinting upon it. The moments in which the status quo is broken are the moments in which change is created. The destruction of racial segregation in America, the end of an oppressive British regime in India, the awareness created by Thích Quảng Đức of Buddhist persecution in Vietnam - the accomplishments of civil disobedience are innumerable.

The beauty of civil disobedience is that it is the highest form of patriotism. Today, movements like Black Lives Matters and the Women’s March dominate the news. It is heartening. These people care so deeply about their country that they will demonstrate against the wrongs in government to advocate for a better America. Many say protesting is unpatriotic and that we need to trust the process of government. But, the United States of America would still be a colony if that was true. Jim Crow Laws would still exist. Children would be working in factories and women would not have the vote. In my opinion, there is nothing more patriotic than peaceful resistance. It is an effective and powerful tool to speak to the capitol and to call for change.

Throughout history activism has stood as how citizens would petition for changes in government. It served as the catalysts that would push forward justice and necessary changes. The most popular version of activism is civil disobedience, where a protestor will break the laws that he or she deems unfair in the attempt to bring to light how the system is broken. However, in recent times civil disobedience and activism have seemingly earned a bad reputation as annoying and at times un-American. Protestors will face uncivility from others who see no problem will the law, they will face prejudice from the law and they will face jail time determined by the law. In order to protect the First Amendment and allow for positive changes to occur in society,

Pierre Bourdieu who exhibits a Marxist framework provided the concept of social capital. This French sociologist explained the reciprocity between cultural capital, economic capital, and social capital (Lane, 0000). Cultural capital provides relevance to style or education; Economic capital is understood as socioeconomic status (SES), profitability, annual income, and profession; Social capital refers to the size of netwok, the ability to access that network, and the types of capitals help while also taking into account the amount each is worth (Bofota, 0000). The core of social capital is that social networks have value (Bofota, 0000).

“The question is not if we will be extremists, but what kind of extremists we will be. The nation and the world are in dire need of creative extremists.” ― Martin Luther King Jr. Heroes and ordinary people both made the most change during the Civil Rights Movement. They were creative extremists. In March it shows ordinary people started to dehumanize themselves with nonviolent strategies before taking action for the first time in Nashville. Ordinary People have boycotted stores because of Mayor West not letting African-Americans be served on the lunch counters. After a protesters house had been bombed they sended a message to other activists and in response thousands of people had gathered the next day at Tennessee State to march on the city hall.Heroes and Ordinary People needed one another to make a change for African-Americans to vote and to have a better opportunity of a better life.

His most persuasive example, perhaps, focuses on Italian regional governments. Putnam finds that ideology, party politics, and wealth matter far less than one may think; what truly allowed for effective governance in Italy were civic engagement and community activism (2). Such a conclusion seems intuitive: when citizens are more engaged and vocal in their communities, their governments can adapt easier to implement policies that may benefit them. Nevertheless, a society based heavily on public social spaces may fall prey to fostering the same kind of automatism of accepting established beliefs that Mill warns about (5). If Putnam is right in that social norms ought to be treated as a public good for the betterment of society, then avenues for dissent and social spaces must be created for those who do not find such norms fulfilling. This is because, as Mills argues, “it is the … proper condition of a human being … to find out what part of recorded experience is properly applicable to his own circumstances and character” (5); the inherent diversity of the human experience makes social norms impossible to universalize. A common framework or purpose (e.g. creating safer streets) is indispensable, but not without a plurality of viewpoints. Here is where Benkler’s solution intersects with Putnam’s – when the suppression of certain viewpoints is inevitable (i.e. due to herd mentality or the need for stability), individuals can use online communities to develop their ideas or to find