The presentation of the data in the first 200 or so pages was excellent. In the author does a good job showing what the USA has lost in jettisoning its classic membership based civic associations.
But the author refuses to consider or is unaware of some causes, effects and solutions to the problem that do not fit in with faculty lounge political chic. For instance, she never considers the possibility that civil rights laws have made our country into a "nation of enemies" to quote Phillip K. Howard. Surely, the government granting citizens the opportunity to sue one another for slights to ethnic pride or whatever had SOMETHING to do with the civic disintegration she describes. Immigration is another issue that might also have something to do with the diminishment of democracy that she decries. Not even touched. That despite social science evidence from Robert Putnam on how diversity diminishes social capital. Many of the old line civic institutions such as the Knights of Pythias or Columbus, etc. were male only. The author makes little no mention of how feminism helped to destroy these institutions. Men have a need to associate with one another in the absence of women. Why is it that the author does nothing to refute my sneaking suspicion that feminists dedicated themselves to suing or otherwise threatening these "bastions of male privilege" if they didn't admit women on the same basis, thereby depriving them of some of their point?
Also not touched is the elite obsession with "multiculturalism". If those in the cultural high ground encourage citizens to divide themselves up into squabbling ethnic, racial and sexual minorities, of COURSE there will be civic disintegration. This omission is blaring. But, I would guess only a professor could miss it.
Her analysis of public sector unions is utterly laughable. She considers them an important civic institutions that build social cohesiveness, etc. A few years after she has written this, these very same public sector unions are bankrupting towns, municipalities, states, etc. I cannot imagine that this is as great a benefit as Theda had imagined they would be.
Not only does the government get off easy in Theda's analysis, but government is an important provider of social capital. If, a benevolent and protective government provides all that Theda thinks it should, what need is there for the Benevolent and Protective order of Elks? That the government might have made the old style civic institutions surplus to requirements is, (obviously, as it's not a faculty lounge issue) not even considered.
I admire the author's collecting of the facts, but the author's mind is so addled by political correctness that her analysis is, in a word, stupid.
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required. Learn more
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Loading your book clubs
There was a problem loading your book clubs. Please try again.
Not in a club? Learn more
Join or create book clubs
Choose books together
Track your books
Bring your club to Amazon Book Clubs, start a new book club and invite your friends to join, or find a club that’s right for you for free.
![Diminished Democracy: From Membership to Management in American Civic Life (The Julian J. Rothbaum Distinguished Lecture Series Book 8) by [Theda Skocpol]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51QatcUL32L._SY346_.jpg)
Follow the Author
Something went wrong. Please try your request again later.
Popular titles by this author
Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1
About the author
Follow authors to get new release updates, plus improved recommendations.
