Kyra Hendrickson

Zeigler
AP Gov/Econ
13 October 2016
Bowling Alone Analysis
Harvard professor of international affairs and political analyst Robert D. Putnam in his
highly acclaimed 1995 Journal of Democracy submission titled Bowling Alone: Americas
Declining Social Capital lamented the widespread disenchantment toward active social
engagement, asserting that over the last few decades, American citizens were observed to be
trending towards individual apathy over group involvement. Though this declining social capital
was hardly considered a new theme, Putnam contended that this trend was in direct correlation
with the steady decline of bowling league participation, using such as a metaphor to illustrate the
topics of his particular interest. However, fifteen years later following the terrorist attacks of 9/11,
Putnam, with fellow Harvard professor Thomas H. Sander, reflected on the claims made in the
previous article with Still Bowling Alone? The Post-9/11 Split, revisiting the reasoning for and
predicted extent of the negative trends observed in adolescent sociopolitical activism.
Should any of this actually matter to American citizens, or is it a necessary side effect of
constantly evolving societal values? Putnam stands by the former. The author gently reminds the
reader of the observant Tocquevilles assertion that social capital, defined by Putnam as the
social norms and trust formed through association that facilitate cooperation for mutual benefit,
is necessary to Americas ability to make democracy work. Though this position is valid, the
author never actually gives any evidence for why this negative shift in primary that is to say,

face to face association would hypothetically cast a dark shadow on democratic proceedings.
Although the abstract maintains that the exposition is meant to observe the notable decline in the
vibrancy of American civil society, Putnam continually states the importance of noting the
trends without ever attempting to give significance to the article as a whole. His only reasoning for
why the trends should matter is a single mans opinion from the early 1830s, only serving to send
him deeper into the hole of its important because its important.
In the opinion of many reading Bowling Alone in 2016, Putnams view on association
is traditional and unaccepting of the provisions of a technologically evolving nation. The
countertrends briefly discussed in the original article concerning tertiary informal
association are well illustrated by the authors myopic projection of bowling leagues dying out by
2010; though bowling in leagues is slowly decreasing in popularity, bowling with family and
friends is increasing. As discussed in Still Bowling Alone, social capital is evolving. Putnam
was correct in assuming that this was necessary for a healthy society, but the means of gaining it
must not be limited to the authors traditional definition.
Though Putnams argument that encouraging socialization in the young and malleable
could civically restore America is based on the unproven assumption that America needs
restoration in the first place, Still Bowling Alone proves that his hypothesis was correct.
Following the 9/11 attacks, the members of the namesake generation were in their most
impressionable years, bringing with this new generation an expansion of interest in public affairs.
Putnam and his Harvard colleague concede, therefore, that Bowling Alone chronicled the civic
decline of the nation without allowing for the impact of technology and the media to be taken into
consideration.