Ming the Mechanic:
Diversity counterproductive to social capital?

The NewsLog of Flemming Funch
 Diversity counterproductive to social capital?2007-11-07 00:51
4 comments
by Flemming Funch

Metafilter:
James Wilson's article in Commentary magazine talks about Harvard sociologist Robert Putnam's essay recently published in Scandinavian Political Studies. In the essay, Putnam publicizes the findings of his research, conducted in rural districts, towns, and cities, whose conclusion establishes that diverse neighborhoods show less "social capital" because ethnically diverse residents seem to distrust each other.

Putnam has discovered that friendship, carpooling, participating in local projects is much lower in ethnically heterogeneous communities than in homogeneous ones. His research reveals that the exception to the tendency of diversity to inhibit "social trust" occurs in ethnically diverse military or religious settings as well as in social circles with intermarried couples. Wilson adds sports teams to the list of these exceptional places where ethnically different people click well.
Duh. One doesn't create community just by putting people next to each other. But if that's what one does, yes, it is more likely that the people who're most similar will develop relationships and social trust. Everything else being equal, the white middleclass working family with kids is likely to relate to their neighbors who also are white middleclass working families with kids, and they can babysit for each other, and come to each other's barbecues, and meet when they're picking the kids up from school in their minivans. And maybe they're less clear on how to relate to the unemployed black guy across the street who's sitting in front of his house all day.

Diverse groups of people are more likely to become bonded together, not just by proximity, but by either a common purpose or a shared history. If you were in the army together, or you work in the same company, the diversity is not so likely to get in the way.

And if social capital is a kind of capital, it would be reasonable to expect that differences generate potential value, and bigger differences can create more value. Meaning, we're worth more to each other, notbecause we're the same, but because something we do is complementary to what the others do. Even if you're similar people, a lot of the value in the social relation come from the areas where there's a difference. If nothing else, that your neighbors are home on a day when you want to go out, so they can babysit. But bigger differences can produce more value. If one of your neighbors is a auto mechanic, and you're a klutz, there's obviously some value in getting along well with him, even if he has a different "profile" from you, as he can repair your car. And if there's something else you can do that he can't, great.

So, the diversity IS the social capital to a large degree. Except for that it doesn't get activated unless the parties somehow get close enough together to form some links between them. Which is a little bit of a puzzle, of course.


[< Back] [Ming the Mechanic]

Category:  

4 comments

7 Nov 2007 @ 11:09 by swanny : A Vision
Get of gander at this
Its really hard or was hard for me to see the "vision" aspect
but note the collaborative part... thats a clue

A Vision of Students Today
at Youtube

link = [link]  



7 Nov 2007 @ 16:37 by Aaron Simmons @209.243.24.214 : Well spoken (written)
This was an eye-opener. One thing that frustrates me about typical "diversity" training is that it practically becomes a primer on politically correct racism. That is, "this is how white people prefer to be treated, and this is how black people prefer to be trated, and this is how Buddhists prefer to be treated, etc. This approach annoys me because it overlooks the great unifying truth: we are ALL different, and we are ALL the same. People need only to treat each other with respect, and the world would have so much social capital we wouldn't know what to do with it. :-)  


8 Nov 2007 @ 02:02 by ming : Diversity
Yeah, unfortunately diversity is often reduced to a backwards way of having to be the same as everybody else. We're all different, we can't deny it. Yet we're all made of the same stuff, all the same in many ways. At the same time. Much more value would be found in actually being allowed to be different, without having to be told how exactly we're supposed to be different.  


10 Feb 2013 @ 09:30 by Jum @221.181.232.146 : wErkffdjpIuyQdZ
Pink and red and animal print - love this combo.You are rlaely interested in the peoples personality and stories, you're not only a pic hunter.That , for me, makes the difference comparing to the most other fashion blogs.You add Lebendigkeit.  


Your Name:
Your URL: (or email)
Subject:       
Comment:
For verification, please type the word you see on the left:


Other stories in
2010-07-10 13:01: Strong Elastic Links
2010-07-08 02:27: Truth: superconductivity for scalable networks
2010-06-27 02:28: Be afraid, be very afraid
2008-07-06 23:20: Laws of social networks
2008-06-20 15:40: Peer material production
2008-05-06 13:57: Why can't we stick to our goals?
2008-02-21 21:16: Open social networks
2007-11-08 01:49: The value of connections
2007-07-13 23:42: Plan vs Reality
2007-07-12 22:53: Emergence and democracy



[< Back] [Ming the Mechanic] [PermaLink]? 


Link to this article as: http://ming.tv/flemming2.php/__show_article/_a000010-001899.htm
Main Page: ming.tv