Other Sellers on Amazon
& FREE Shipping
98% positive over last 12 months
& FREE Shipping
97% positive over last 12 months
& FREE Shipping
90% positive over last 12 months
Usually ships within 4 to 5 days.
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 Cloud Reader.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Follow the Author
OK
Diminished Democracy (The Julian J. Rothbaum Distinguished Lecture Series) (Volume 8) Paperback – March 15, 2004
| Price | New from | Used from |
Enhance your purchase
Pundits and social observers have voiced alarm each year as fewer Americans involve themselves in voluntary groups that meet regularly. Thousands of nonprofit groups have been launched in recent times, but most are run by professionals who lobby Congress or deliver social services to clients. What will happen to U.S. democracy if participatory groups and social movements wither, while civic involvement becomes one more occupation rather than every citizen’s right and duty? In Diminished Democracy, Theda Skocpol shows that this decline in public involvement has not always been the case in this country―and how, by understanding the causes of this change, we might reverse it.
- Print length388 pages
- LanguageEnglish
- PublisherOUP
- Publication dateMarch 15, 2004
- Dimensions5.5 x 0.97 x 8.5 inches
- ISBN-100806136278
- ISBN-13978-0806136271
Frequently bought together
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
Editorial Reviews
About the Author
Theda Skocpol is Victor S. Thomas Professor of Government and Sociology and Director of the Center for American Political Studies at Harvard University. She is the author of numerous books, including Protecting Soldiers and Mothers: The Political Origins of Social Policy in the United States and The Missing Middle: Working Families and the Future of American Social Policy.
Don't have a Kindle? Get your Kindle here, or download a FREE Kindle Reading App.
Product details
- Publisher : OUP (March 15, 2004)
- Language : English
- Paperback : 388 pages
- ISBN-10 : 0806136278
- ISBN-13 : 978-0806136271
- Item Weight : 15.6 ounces
- Dimensions : 5.5 x 0.97 x 8.5 inches
- Best Sellers Rank: #1,049,218 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #1,251 in Civics & Citizenship (Books)
- #1,754 in Democracy (Books)
- Customer Reviews:
Customer reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
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.
Historians have asked if the US was qualitatively different from other countries. ("Vineyard of liberty" etc.) The issues raised by the book give us another way to address the question. Perhaps Americans were more inclined to join such nation spanning groups because as an immigrant, footloose people, if they did not have centuries of binding to the same soil and neighbours, they wanted some other and multiple means of belonging? Was the striking success of the groups in some part due to such inchoate urgings?
Another way to test would be to look into the history of similar groups in Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
Skocpol also points out that from the 1960s onwards, the membership of such groups in the US fell significantly. She advanced several reasons. But there is one possible reason for some of the decline that she did not mention. From the mid 1950s, TV became pervasive. Remember that joining a volunteer group is done in your recreational time. TV is a notorious competitor for that time, due to its convenience and cheapness. Plus, and more specifically, if one of your reasons (possibly unconscious) for joining a national group is to be part of a larger world, then TV assuages that to some extent. Granted, some of this may be illusory, but so what?






