Human Society Is Made Up

¶ … Human society is made up of individuals and the interactions that form between them. This means that the social bonds between individuals shape the society in which they exist. These social bonds have been called the "social capital" by which society functions, but "social capital" can also be harnessed for specific purposes. For instance, the nature of politics is based in the realm of social interactions between individuals. The system of trust and mutual exchange which fuels politics, can be referred to as an example of how "social capital" exists in the real world.

It is through association with political parties that an example of "social capital" playing a role in political behavior can be made. This is not to be confused with voting or following politics, as these actions can be performed all alone by an individual. But association with a political party, by its very nature, means social interaction with other people; and this is the basis of "social capital." For instance, "From the 1950's to the 1960's growing numbers of Americans worked for a political party during election campaigns, ringing doorbells, stuffing envelopes, and the like." (Putnam, 2000, p.38) This type of activity, working for political parties, is an example of how "social capital" can be directly related to political behavior. However, since actual voting rates have been in decline since the late 1960's, and fewer people are willing to expend "social capital" on political activities, party organizations have had a need to become more organized, professional, and efficient through the use of new technologies and social media.

In the 21st century the advent of new technologies have allowed for the development of new and innovative social networks that can be utilized as a means of 'social capital." People no longer have to physically work for a political party, as they did in the past, but can interact with others politically through social media sites. For instance, Facebook, MySpace, and other popular social networks have been instrumental in organizing a variety of political movements from the Arab Spring to the Occupy Wall Street protests. These two examples also specifically targeted the young and for many were their first foray into politics. The posts by several other students are correct when they said that targeting the young for participation in politics through the use of social networks has been demonstrated, and can be in the future, an effective means of developing "social capital."

Part 2:

One startling statistic that is pointed out by Wattenberg is that since 1972, the rate at which newspaper readership has declined has been about 1% a year. (Wattenberg, 2008, p.15) And while the attacks of September 11, 2001 did cause an immediate rise in readership, the trend of declining newspaper readership has continued for the last 50 years. An interesting coincidence may be that the rise of the Internet has coincided with the decline in the readership of newspapers. As stated by other students, there seems to be a generational aspect to this trend as younger people are more likely to get their information from the newer forms of communication: Internet sites.

When people stop reading newspapers and watching television to get their news, as often is the case with younger people, there is the danger of receiving a limited view of the news. This can be particularly acute when it comes to politics because many Internet sites dedicated to providing political information are often extremely partisan in nature. And because people have a tendency to visit Internet sites that reflect their own political views, the information they are exposed to is also extremely partisan. In other words, people will most likely get their information from sites that possess a political view that is similar to their own. They get the kind of information they want to hear and do not receive a balanced view of the facts surrounding any particular issue. As a result, people's view of politics have become increasingly partisan with the electorate less likely to accept a non-partisan view. One example of this is the recent political movement known as the "Tea Party." It's Republican members of Congress, under intense pressure from their Tea Party voters back home, have refused to engage in any compromise legislation with the Democrats. It is likely that many of those same Tea Party members get their news exclusively from right wing news outlets which espouse only a right wing view of politics.

Part 3:

It was on June 28, 2012 that the Supreme Court of the United States announced its ruling on the Affordable Care Act, widely known as "Obamacare," and demonstrated how politically partisan the nation has become. The Affordable Care Act stipulates that every American either obtain health insurance, or pay a fine and enter into a government run health care exchange. This mandate is seen as the core of the legislation because without every American involved, there just is no way the government can afford to provide health care for everyone. Those who usually do not use the health care system, primarily the young, must contribute so that those who do, the sick and old, can obtain the necessary care. However, Americans became split over whether the government could mandate that an individual citizen engage in commerce, in this instance purchase health insurance. In a move that shocked the nation, Chief Justice Roberts cast the deciding vote in support of Obamacare; deciding that the individual mandate was in fact a tax and constitutional under Congress' right to tax. However, this decision enraged conservatives while it was simultaneously seen as honorable by liberals; clearly demonstrating how politically polarized the nation has become during the last 50 years.