America the Changing - Minnesota State University, Mankato



America the Changing

As Bob Dylan’s song goes, “the times, they are a changing.” Since its infancy the United States has seen profound change and has grown and matured much in the same way humans do. As it was first born there was a sense of innocent idealism that drove the country forward. Then, as a toddler explores his or her surroundings, so did the new country explore its seemingly limitless boundaries. With the advent of trains and cars America gained mobility, like a toddler learning to walk. Then came the terrible twos of unchecked greed and worker exploitation. As it matured, though, and gained standing in the world community, it learned somewhat of the value of teamwork. As America has entered its teenage era it has become more self-centered and preoccupied with material things like money and possessions.

But now, as the country moves into a new millennium, there is evidence that it may be on the cusp of a new stage of growth. I believe a new social conscious is emerging. This can be seen in trends in communities that are starting to take shape, the emerging role of new communication technology, and the growing desire for stronger ethical forces. Depending on how the citizens of this country reach to these changes, America may either as a moral adult in the world community or it may turn to a life of delinquency.

Some of the changes that America will have to face are the present and future trends that are shaping communities. Since the 1940s and 1950s one trend that has drastically altered America is the trend to move from the city to the suburbs (Marcionis and Parillo 106). This trend has been a mixed blessing at best. While the suburbs do offer the lure of private land homes, there is a huge downside too. Because they are so spread out, they require reliance on cars instead of mass transit. But because they are still a lot denser than rural areas, there is more congestion. Suburban developments are still in such high demand that it seems as if they fly up over night in some areas. They are built uniformly and economically but seem to lose something in the process. As stated in the book Community of the Future, “most of us [suburbanites] don’t feel as if we are members of a community; we just live or work next to each other (17).” The economic nature and quick planning of these communities leaves people with things like lackluster architecture, populations that are disconnected from the traditional social gathering places, like the market square, by distance, and communities with little or no distinguishing characteristics at all.

However, there are a growing number of people that are rediscovering that communities are more than just the sum of all their parts. These pioneers are trying to reconnect people socially by making physical changes to communities. The trend is called “New Urbanism” and it believes in ideals like encouraging walking to encourage neighbor interaction, putting social gathering places like parks in more areas, and locating community based businesses close to peoples’ homes. All this is in the hopes that it will strengthen people’s ties to their communities and, in turn, their commitment and involvement in maintaining and enhancing these communities.

Author Rita Sussmuth, in Community of the Future, discusses another trend that ties in closely with the trend of New Urbanism. She says, “society is still subject to a disproportion: on the one hand we see the movers and shakers and those who are involved in the community. On the other hand, we observe a good deal of inertia, complacency, self-satisfaction, and unwillingness to change (29).” Even at MSU, this trend can be observed. In this URBS 230 class only a handful of people ever participate in discussions and ask and answer questions, the rest seem bored and indifferent. The trend is continued in almost every class I have had at MSU. This societal split between caring, committed individuals and apathetic ones signals to me that America is in fact on the verge of a new direction, with those at the forefront leading movements like New Urbanism and those caught in the ideals of the past allowing themselves to be caught up in the drudgery of the suburban mentality. Apathy can only build up for so long before some major event causes people to face reality. So if ideas like New Urbanism do not convince people to start investing in their communities, some catastrophic events will. As long as we are able to survive these events our national community will grow and mature.

Emerging technology is something that can either help or hurt our survival chances. First and foremost is the advancement of the Internet as a new, powerful tool of communication. As discussed in chapter nine of Community of the Future, the Internet has great potential to connect people and form “virtual communities (98).” Being online instantly connects one to literally millions of people. If one does not like or feel accepted by the people in one’s neighborhood there are thousands of people online to instantly form real bonds with. It is almost getting to the point where people can conceivably never need to leave their house. All they have to do is work at home, order supplies online, and entertain and interact with other people online. I recently helped organize a conference at which 18 organizations from all over central and southern MN came and set up information tables. Without the awesome communicative powers of the Internet it would have been very difficult. The Internet has other advantages. As discussed in chapter 11 of Community of the Future, because interactions are not face to face, people have to read what you say before they can judge you in any way (117). This has the potential to open up many new lines of communication that were formally blocked by prejudice and discrimination. One blockage that this might help to clear is media bias. For example: if your country is about to invade another and the only media coverage you get is from your country’s point of view, all you have to do is go to a forum frequented by people from that country and ask them what their perspective is.

As good as all this communication sounds there is a potential downside to it. The issue of isolation from the surrounding physical community was discussed in class. The point was made that if people spend most of their free time interacting with a virtual community, they will have little time and, consequently, little care for the real community they live in. The point was also raised that virtual communities behave much differently than real ones. If someone offends you online you can simply turn the computer off and be done with it, whereas if someone on the street offends you you cannot just turn him or her off, you have to deal with him or her. I believe that this trend of conflict avoidance created by computers is contributing to American society’s growing inability to deal with conflict. Most of the people I talk to will shy away from any discussion relating to politics or religion, no matter what the issue is. It is clear that the internet is a double-edged sword, it is up the communities of the future to decide which edge to use.

Along with the issue of the Internet, there are other ethical questions that the communities of the future will have to answer. Among these, one issue that stands out to me is the issue of creating socially responsible corporations. It seems to be the position of at least some of the authors of Community of the Future that corporations are starting to develop a social conscience. They cite cases where these corporations have instituted community service projects and have tried to include workers more in big decisions. But to me the idea of a corporation having a real, meaningful, and productive social conscious is akin to an elephant trying to have a social conscious about a colony of mice it is living with. Sure, it will be able to scatter some resources to some of the larger and obviously needy groups but many will still be ignored or accidentally squashed underfoot. I feel that corporations are too large and disconnected from local populations to be effective, contributing members. Rather, I feel it should be the responsibility of small local businesses. As discussed in A Green City Program, local businesses are more invested in the community (35). They have neither the will nor the capital to move operations over seas, as large corporations do (Berg, Magilavy, and Zuckerman 35). Since the owners of the stores live in the local area, they will be more sensitive to the needs and problems of the local area (Berg, Magilavy, and Zuckerman 35). Though they may not have the financial resources to give large donations to charities, as large corporations do, many small businesses can serve the same market that one large corporations does, ant the contributions can add up.

The communities of the future are in store for many great changes. It will be a time for America to assess what trends it will embrace, how it will use emerging technology, and what it really values. Whatever the outcome, there will be enormous impact on the rest of the world and future generations.

Bibliography

Berg, Peter, Beyrl Magilavy, Seth Zuckerman. A Green City Program for the San Francisco Bay Area and Beyond. San Francisco: Planet Drum Books, 1990.

De Graff, John; D. Wann; T. Naylor. Affluenza. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 2002

Hesselbien, Francis; M. Goldsmith; R. Beckhard; R. Schubert. Community of the Future. San Francisco: Josey-Bass Publishers, 1998

King, Cheryl Simrell; C. Stivers. Government is Us. London: Sage Publications, 1998.

Marcionis, John J.; V. Parillo. Cities and Urban Life, Second Edition. London: Prentice Hall, 2001.

Roseland, Mark. Toward Sustainable Communities. Gabriola Island BC, Canada: New Society Publishers, 1998.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download