The following entry was written initially as a response to a comment on Connecticut Local Politics. It turned into a fairly long message, so I thought it would be best for it to stand on its own here.

Independent1, I do not think that the observation that ‘people are motivated for the most part by self-interest’ is particularly cynical or negative. If anything, I think there is great benefit in getting people to recognize that working together with ones neighbors, in helping the people around one is an act of self-interest. It is part of the reason I often refer back to John Donne,

“If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friend's or of thine own were: any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.”

Likewise, while I believe that many people joined fraternal societies, not so much to protect themselves, but out of a need for community, it is true that many organizations, and credit unions are a great example, are created for the members’ mutual benefit and protection. In many ways, if we go back to the Social Contract, we see government as being yet another organization of people for their mutual benefit.

As I read through Bowling Alone, it isn’t just the fraternal societies and bowling leagues that have lost members. It isn’t just philanthropic organizations that have declined. People have become less involved with the political process and Putnam observes the high correlation between political involvement and philanthropic involvement.

Hence, I’m not sure that I buy the idea involvement has been a result of government taking care of peoples needs. I would also note that the decline involvement, based on the data that Putnam presents really started around 1960, so I’m not sure that it is a function of the increased demands on time. Putnam also notes that the decline is more correlated to generations than it is to age or year. That is, the involvement in community activities is a function of the year one is born, instead one’s age or the year of the study.

All of that said, there may be something about the self-interest, the safety net the government provides and the lack of perceived threats one a generational basis that is involved in the decrease in civic action.

The Great Depression and World War II weighed heavily on my parents upbringing. They understood the importance of working together. Help your neighbor, because next week, it may be you that will need the help. Those of us brought up in the fifties or sixties, and I suspect even more so for those younger than myself, have been brought up with a certain sense that we can make it own our own, without recognizing our roles in society.

Yes, some of this may be because of the government safety net that those who lived through the Great Depression and World War II fought so hard for. Some of it may have been from the prosperity after World War II, but some of it also has come from some sort of perception of invulnerability.

September 11th challenged a little of this and around my neighborhoods, I saw brief upticks in civic involvement after 9/11. Today, I went to church and heard about a bunch of parishioners that went down to help people rebuild their lives in New Orleans. The hurricane season of 2005 may also serve as a reminder that we are all in this together.

So, I suspect that you and I may substantially agree on the issues of civic involvement. My concern is that we need civic involvement to keep our society strong. I appreciate the civic involvement that comes through some of the well thought out discussions on the blogs. I hope to find other ways of promoting civic involvement, because I do believe we have a lot to lose without it.