-You know better than to assume I'd assert a drop in -politicization, on those grounds, without evidence. -Although the study is controversial, I find persuasive -in the main lines Robert Putnam's Bowling Alone, -detailing the drop in participation in voluntary -associations -- not all of which are political.
It's not that I don't find any of Putnam's arguments interesting, but as many have noted in critiquing his work, he ignores an explosion of new civic groups over the last decades. The number of people as a percentage of the population involved in some sort of volunteer or civic group is stillquite astounding in America. And while it's hard to know how to compare the whole range of self-help groups like AA et all compared to the Elks of yesteryear, Americans still remain inveterate joiners. And then you have the Internet with the whole explosion of new kinds of networking allowed by it-- LBO itself being one example.
So count me as unconvinced by Putnam.
- The -stuff about the % of the population voting is totally -misleading, and I'm surprise to see you, a trained -sociologist, say such foolishness. Voting _rates_, -percentage of eligible voters voting, are downa and -have been consistently down for a long time, and not -just among kids and disenfranchised felons (who are -not counted as eligible voters in any responsible -study I know of.)
No, voting rates are not particularly down. See http://elections.gmu.edu/turnout_rates_graph.htm There was a dropoff in 1972 because 18-20 year olds were added to the eligible pool, but even with that 2004 had voting rates comparable to the highwater levels of the 1960s and higher than years like 1948 and 1956.
-Moreover -- and this fits in which your own paean to -glories of machine politics (as a Chicagoan I am a tad -skeptical), the voting ois not _organized_ outside the -right -- it's largely an individualistic activity.
There is something to that, but it's not clear that voting as part of a machine turnout shows greater civic involvement, just better organization by the machine. It's quite possible that people are more politically engaged today but just are alienated from voting itself -- think Chuck O :)
-Leaving voting aside, with the labor movement in -apparantly terminal decline and the social movements -scattered and fragmented, what is this evidence you -see of of increase in populaer political -participation?
I reject the idea that the labor movement is in terminal decline. That's a big part of where we differ. There are lots of challenges faced by the labor movement but they still continue to innovate and make successes. The key is for areas of success to surpass areas of decline-- which is not as impossible as a lot of defeatists on labor make it out. There are still 15 million union workers out there, a large base from which to launch a revival.
-I might as well -accuse you 9with more justice) of being Pollyana or -Pangloss who fails to recognize the terrible fucking -shape we are in and the obstacles that we have to -overcome, withoughta clue about how to do it, even if -we were to follow your preferred strteagy and -rejuvenate a progressive wing to the Democratic Party -and revive the labor movement.
But I am a Pollyanna and proudly so. And I am quite clear about my preferred strategy-- greater support for unions who are doing innovative organizing, a more coordinated political operation within Democratic primaries and in support of progressive electoral victories, and greater ideological coherency supported by new institutions, whether the blogs or the Vast Leftwing Conspiracy groups.
Progressives just kicked Arnold Schwarzennegers political ass in California, are making impressive gains in states like Montana and Colorado, passing minimum wage increases in a host of states, passing mandates for Wal-Mart to provide health care in Maryland, and making strides in a host of other political areas. Sure, the losses at the national level are currently outweighing the overall wins, but there are plenty of examples of success out there.
So we just need to organize, organize, organize to support the successess until they outweigh the losses.
That may be Pollyanna but I think it's infinitely realistic. If there were no successes, then hope might be self-delusionary. But given so many obvious areas of success, why shouldn't I see clear avenues for progressive action and success?
Nathan Newman