novum.substack.com
Fewer friends, relationships on the decline, delayed adulthood, trust at an all-time low, and many diseases of despair. The prognosis is not great.
In 2000, political scientist Robert Putnam published his book Bowling Alone to much acclaim and was first comprehensive look at the decline of social activities in the United States. Now, however, all those same trends have fallen off a cliff. This particular piece looks at sociability trends across various metrics—friendships, relationships, life milestones, trust, and so on—and gives a bird's eye view of the social state of things in 2022.
A piece that I wrote that really picked up on HackerNews recently with over 300+ comments. Some excellent comments there, I suggest reading it over.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I don't agree with Putnam or the article. There are more ways now than ever before and more convenient, thanks to the internet and mobile phones, for people to meet up. A google search shows tons of meetups, same on social media. There is no shortage of ways for people to engage in social activities today. I think rather a lot people are choosing to be alone. Maybe Netflix is more fun than in-person social activities.
I guess this is subjective, but as someone with an active, meat-space social life, it takes time, money and effort to maintain. You can substitute time and effort for money (pasta, red sauce and a screw-top Barbera can go a long way). I know we Americans tend to informally socially segregate by class, but at least my social life bridges that pretty easily. I host a large BBQ with white and blue collar guests every year. It’s amazing what breaking bread together does to bridge divides.
I haven’t found online socializing to be more than a simulacrum for meat-space socializing. Nearly all my friends are current and former teammates from rec sports leagues, current and former coworkers, people I met in young-professionals arts organizations, the bar I used to be a regular at, a book club, etc.
My GF and I are having folks over for dinner, tonight. That involved a more thorough cleaning of the house than we normally do on Saturday morning, a bigger grocery bill to account for the extra food and wine, and starting work in the kitchen at 9:00 this morning to sear the roast and get the slow cooker going.
And, it’s not that we don’t subscribe to multiple streaming services and couldn’t just pop something on tonight and put our feet up. But as others have said, here, it’s instant gratification versus long-term payoff. And, Netflix can be like weed, where you can put a pause on thinking about why you might not be satisfied with how you’re spending your evening.
But hugs, handshakes, smiles, eye contact, laughs, etc. land much differently, in person. As do frank discussions requiring sympathy or empathy.
We try, as much as our schedule, energy levels, and finances allow, to make plans, get people together, host dinner parties, etc. And, while we have not gotten a 1:1 return, the more often we make an effort to be social, the more others do in our direction, as well. And it’s encouraging, how often when we set something up, how many people say, “This was great. We need to do this more often.” You also over time figure out who will reciprocate, socially, and can prioritize spending time with them.
I think so many of us get into a rut once out of school, and there’s nothing making socializing more of a default you have to opt out of.
As someone who went from single and bouncing around family members' homes in fly over country to then having a girlfriend and living in San francisco, I can attest that my social life has blown up but also that it's extremely expensive. I wonder how much being broke factors into sitting around and doing nothing by yourself. Luckily I have not been broke throughout all of this, but I was certainly able to save money and throw it at stocks and whatnot until the last few months in SF.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Not everything is what meets the eye, my friend. The internet is also telling me there's hot singles in my area xD
More options
Context Copy link
New methods for actively meeting up do not compensate for the passive meetups that occur in a community. Making friends in realspace based on shared activities has been the human default, such as in school, university, work, church and social clubs, and the decline of e.g. church membership and the increase in online time is reflected in a decline in the average number of close friends and in social trust. Seeing lots of meetups online is a sign that there is a desire for community involvement that is not being satisfied in the same way that someone dying in the desert would really want to post about water.
More options
Context Copy link
The last time I checked for meetups, they were all either not sufficiently local, mostly old ladies and/or exclusively for women, at inconvenient times, or all of the above. Notice I didn't mention whether or not any of these were remotely interesting. Begars V Choosers and all that. I did see ads for a local axe-throwing place, but even assuming they'd let a blind person throw an axe, the timing was perfect such that the pandemmic killed it.
I mean, I'm writing this at 2:09AM on Sunday morning, having recently woke up. It's a little earlier than I'd normally be up, but I had nothing at all to do last night and wound up asleep way early. I'm not sure I could get an Uber in this town pre-dawn on a Sunday, not sure when busses start (on Sunday), and don't exactly live somewhere walkable. My options even after sunrise are mostly to call some missionaries to ask for a ride to their church, which isn't social activity so much as hymns, testimonials, and discussing the esoteric religious concept of the week. There's a park near me, but it's only open 12:00-5:00PM, and isn't exactly a social option so much as a cheaper alternative to installing a playground in my back yard.
But maybe I haven't checked for meetups recently enough? Everyone insists that meetup is a problem-solver these days, and I'm somewhat out-of-date.
More options
Context Copy link
So why not revolt against the modern world, if it is dehumanizing us like this? Or, a more modest proposal, rethink how we develop or interface with technology?
I mean, it seems to be a rather self defeating argument to bring up the fact that we have more ways now than ever to connect when we are standing right next to the fact that we are connecting less and less. And it certainly didn't stand as a valid argument in my household that playing video games was more fun than visiting grandma during Christmas. And whilst I didn't agree with it as a kid, I can certainly agree with and appreciate it now.
There can be market failures, in the sense of meaning individual rationality = collective rationality.
If you're the first one to start a social revolution against, say, social media technology, then your expected costs may exceed your expected benefits: you look weird, possibly dangerous, and there might be high risks from the revolution failing. Thus, it can be irrational for you to start the revolution even if it would be in your interests (and most/all other people's) if everyone was to become a social revolutionary.
In economics jargon, a change can be collectively rational (even Pareto optimal) but not a possible result of individually rational actions (not a Nash equilibrium).
Jon Elster did good work on this idea in the context of Marxist revolutions: it can be rational for the proletariat not to rebel, even if it would be in their best interests.
The term 'revolt against the modern world' is not revolutionary in the marxist sense. It's referential to Evola and a book that carries the name. It's less Karl Marx and more Varg Vikernes.
Yes, but is it different with respect to this market failure, i.e. it can be rational for everyone to change, but irrational for individuals to change?
It can be, but I don't see how that's a relevant... whatever it is. There are an endless amount of things that could be. I don't understand the point you are making. It seems like you are presupposing a framework of economic rationality and I don't understand why or what you think necessitates it. It's not about deducing what others think and seeing if it can or can not fit within some predefined rubric of 'rationality'.
It's like you are extrapolating into a wider context to get away from a question that isn't about anything other than yourself.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
It's probably an instant gratification vs long term benefit tradeoff.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link