A Case for the Collective

“The quest for community will not be denied, for it springs from some of the powerful needs of human nature- needs for a clear sense of cultural purpose, membership, status, and continuity.” – The Quest for Community

In 1935, Parker Brothers, a toy and game manufacturer, launched the board game Monopoly, which encouraged players to accumulate real estate.  Included on the board was a space called “Community Chest”.  In the 1930s, hundreds of US cities participated in a local Community Chest, where a single unified campaign raised money for local social services.  This civic account was citizen-driven to provide stable funding for social services in the city, with funds accumulated voluntarily by the public at large. When a player landed on a Community Chest space, they drew a card that would typically reward the player with money. 

In Robert Nisbet’s 1951 book, “The Quest for Community”, Nisbet laments the decline in civic participation and the ensuing loss of community at the hands of modern governments, leading to the alienation and loss of belonging of the citizenry.  To reestablish the necessary social cohesion needed in a successful society, Nisbet calls for a new “group laissez-faire” to both limit political power and provide individuals with a voluntary source of membership and belonging.   

Civic society can be defined as a collection of groups that bridge the divide between the individual and the state.  Historically, group membership in society came from the family, the church, the neighborhood, and other mutual aid groups.  These freely formed groups provided the framework of institutions that not only shaped social life but also provided the norms for society, creating a civilizing effect.  Mostly, institutions of civil society dispersed authority, limiting the power and influence of the government over the social life of citizens.   

It was primarily during the last third of the twentieth century that the loss of community took hold.  That is, the loss of ties to people and groups, with face-to-face interactions, which have since been replaced with impersonal connections, including digital relationships.  This has created a nation of rootless, isolated individuals, making communities less sociable, more secular, and more individualistic.  The addition of TV and technology has only increased the divide. 

Lack of participation in organic social ties has led to greater dependence on government.  This has shifted more and more power away from the individual to the state, which was all too willing to fill the void.  The transition has transferred the benefits of charitable organizations and churches to an unhealthy reliance on the government.  As a result, as bureaucratization grew, the community shrank. Where communities once existed to solve social problems, the growing state sector now has caused apathy among the people.  The state, instead, would take care of all of it.  Yet, freedom from want and insecurity would prove to be a false promise. 

With government encroachment leaving a vacuum for belonging in the community, it is sure to be filled elsewhere.  In fact, the new Democratic Socialist Party of America (DSA) seems to be winning over the hearts and minds of the youth, who are being left out of society, strapped with college loan debt, unable to marry, buy homes, and have children.  With young people suffering from economic insecurity and growing inequality, many believe the game is rigged; that is, they can no longer rise on their own initiative under a capitalist society.  Today, in fact, nearly half of all youth, aged 18-35, believe that socialism should replace capitalism, while 66 percent of Democrats view socialism favorably.  Using the catchphrase, Building Tomorrow Together, the DSA looks to strengthen communal bonds through shared purpose.

The Founders, however, had no such vision.  They purposefully sought a decentralized government and a vigorous community life.  Power was meant to reside at the local level, where regional leaders were more accountable, and self-government was more attainable.    

 As historic forms of community fall from the shift to government, new institutions must be built.  First, we must solidify the separation of community and state, removing excess control from the government.  Second, social problems must be re-addressed first within the family, then the church, and thereafter, the larger community.   Third, free formation of private groups must be permitted to flourish anew. 

Belonging is the most essential ingredient for a functioning society.  It comes from a human desire for place and purpose with others through a shared consciousness.  Until we mend the broken bonds, the much-needed social glue will fail to hold the fragile community together.